|
Post by elioth on Jul 11, 2012 17:08:59 GMT -5
Before we move further with any discussions of who wants what, what is or isn't right, etc., I think it prudent that we repair at least one thing that we learned from the in-person event.
Can someone find and post the intended process for editing, voting, and submitting the document that was created for July 4 so that it can be reviewed, discussed, and re-affirmed or altered as needed.
I suggest we agree on using the voted on document as a starting point, since going further back than that would create unnecessary chaos and only serve to delay action.
My goal is to make sure that from here forward, no person who is participating will have any question as to the procedure we are using, they will feel as though they had sufficient understanding before any voting takes place, and if they don't agree with the procedure, they will have a chance to voice their disagreement, have it reviewed, and, if voted down, have the opportunity to bow out if they so choose.
|
|
|
Post by brighamadams on Jul 11, 2012 17:29:54 GMT -5
I second the motion to clarify our process going forward.
|
|
|
Post by mikelweisser on Jul 11, 2012 17:31:23 GMT -5
I am glad to see us adopting to these messaging boards which might facilitate this step. I am eager to try to move forward with a finished document and start promoting it. We cannot depend on the press to advance our agenda, so we must have things we can get their attention with. A finished doc is a good step, lol
|
|
|
Post by krislewis63 on Jul 11, 2012 17:56:50 GMT -5
just popping in to say I'm here. I'd like to recommend that we keep our discussions in as few forum sections as possible, and preferably as few threads as possible, so things don't slip through notice. i know I'd be peeved if a side conversation happened somewhere obscure and I didn't get a say because I didn't see it... Pretty sure everyone will concur with this concept.
|
|
|
Post by kjlowry on Jul 11, 2012 18:11:58 GMT -5
I do not believe that the process from this point forward has been put into writing except perhaps in the record of the CC2.0 proceedings. The way I remember the proceedings was that there would be: 1. a style committee formed to work on the voted-on-Doc (23 page) in order to make the style of the grievances match and make the document more coherent and succinct. That committee had people that volunteered to serve, but it has not been OFFICIALLY formed or begun work as of yet. 2. Once the document was completed and ready to be voted on...the style committee was supposed to submit it to the delegates for a vote. I do not recall an announced method of doing that NOR do I know if there was a decision as to whether JUST the actual attending delegates would vote on the final doc or whether it would be opened up to ALL elected delegates. Let me know if anyone remembers things differently about this or if there is a written procedure for all this that I am unaware of. Anyway, I do not think there is a way for us to act (online here) in the place of the style committee that we all agreed to at the congress. Perhaps I will copy this into the forum topic that is Questions for the Steering Committee and see if we can get an answer? KJ
|
|
|
Post by Ed Fahrenholz on Jul 16, 2012 20:42:04 GMT -5
KJ, Good idea. I would like to know as much as possible about what the style committee is doing and how far along they are, whoever they are. Also to thank them for doing what they are doing. Ed Fahrenholz NJ -1
|
|