On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 12:22:58PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: > The Secretary has advanced a document outlining his plans and opinion > for conducting a vote on GR 8, advanced by myself. His plans rest in > incorrect premises and draw incorrect conclusions.
Ok, now that people have pointed out that, in this case (modifying the social contract): [1] the constitution doesn't explicit specify what should happen, and thus [2] the secretary has the authority to interpret what the constitution means what are you going to do? [apologize? pursue this, further? ignore the discussion?] [Personally, I think his judgement call (the vote involves two different quorums so must be administered as two votes) was reasonable.] Thanks, -- Raul
