Re: [atlarge-discuss] Off to a bad start

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 01:43 p.m. 14/07/2002 +0200, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Jul 2002 15:30:06 +1200, you wrote:
>
> >>However, the charter is not meant to limit the freedom of action of
> >>the next panel.
> >
> >But, Vittorio, that is exactly what Charters are supposed to do.
>
>Yes, but if you read the way the mandate is worded, I still don't see
>what the next panel would be prevented from doing:

The wording needs  change in order to assure the members that the Panel 
will act in subservience to the Members'  wishes at all times.
The draft leaves too many open ends.
For example

1. There are 11 Panel members now, but no quorum is specified for valid 
decisions. This will facilitate a takeover by a small number of bullying 
Panel members.
2. One week for Chair elections makes it almost certain that the candidate 
with the most votes will become Chair. Bad idea, as this will turn the 
chair into a dictator, especially as only 2 days are given for Panel 
members to vote on issues.
3. The Panel has the option to "directly" manage the website. With 11 
members, what does this mean in practice??
4. "including, but not limited to...." may look good in a contract, but it 
is poison in any Charter that purports to protect members' rights against a 
dictatorial Panel.


--Joop


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de