Re: [Fsfe-uk] AFFS conference, AGM, reform

[MJ Ray]

Alex Hudson wrote:
> If people want a big discussion on the constitution, the affs-project
> mailing list is the best place:

I'd prefer a wider discussion on this and I don't want to obstruct project
work, so please keep it on fsfe-uk.  I intend to announce it in other
places once it's in the archive.

AFFS rules on elections aren't just "a bit wishy-washy" - they simply
don't exist and so far we've fallen back on the voting rules in the
constitution, which work but leave lots of unanswered questions for
elections, most of which can get ugly. While I think the membership
could vote on the rules, I also think it's also possible for ctte to
save them the work.

Similarly, I don't see why AFFS should reject willing ctte when it needs
them, as long as they meet the basic standard in the constitution. Not
holding a vote when there are enough vacancies avoids that embarrassment
and also saves everyone some work. That's an opinion I've told ctte.

Although there is only one AGM a year (9a) and there must be elections at
AGMs (6b), I don't see anything in the current constitution preventing
another election if needed. As you know, my interpretation of 6d is
that it was intended to explicitly allow a postal vote for that but any
failure to meet the condition leaves it undefined.  Dissolution following
an inquorate AGM would not be possible at present without another meeting
more than 21 days later, not automatic.

-- 
MJR/slef