[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Fsfe-uk] Re: Proposed roadmap

From: John Seago
Subject: [Fsfe-uk] Re: Proposed roadmap
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:19:27 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.7.2

On Thursday 01 Jan 1970 00:59, Alex Hudson <address@hidden> wrote:
> I'm personally of the view that accepting amendments is spiritually
> antagonistic to the publication requirements of the proposal;
> particularly where the amendment mostly or wholly supercedes the
> entirety of the proposal.

Having had over thirty years experience of meeting at National level I have 
to tell you that not only are amendments acceptable, they are one of the 
usual methods of proceeding. Amendments which negate the intention of the 
original proposal should not be allowed by the Chair. 

> Whether or not that is constitutionally unacceptable I don't know; the
> practice of previous meetings is that it isn't, but I don't think we've
> properly addressed the issue. I certainly feel I couldn't accept an
> amendment to a constitutional proposal I put forward because that
> doesn't give the membership the notice period I think they need to be
> able to properly consider the proposal.

Perhaps then the way forward is to, (once all are agreed in which fora/list 
discussion takes place), publish proposals as soon as they are formulated, 
to publish counter proposals or amendments as soon as they are formulated, 
discuss the merits of each and as the deadline for notice of the meeting 
approaches each party holding whatever view will have a chance to see what 
the proposals and views of others are/is. Then the Notice of the 
appropriate meeting will be able to contain a full agenda. However there 
has to be an agreed format for all motions, if the AFFS does not wish to 
allow amendment, (even by the Proposer or Seconder), then that is a matter 
which will have to be discussed and voted upon at either an AGM, EGM or 

As I proposed the amendment at last years AGM, I should point out that 
there were a number of ways available to me of approaching the motion put 
by Alex, all of which can best be described as 'Nuclear Options'.

John Seago
GNU/Linux User #219566 http://counter.li.org
AFFS http://www.affs.org.uk/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]