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

[MJ Ray]

Alex Hudson wrote:
> To summarise, if we cannot hold elections outside an AGM, that's a
> problem we need to fix. If we can, there is a gaping hole in the
> democratic safety of AFFS as an organisation, and that's a problem we
> need to fix. Either way, it's a problem. I don't see any reason why this
> cannot be cleared up with an amendment to make it crystal clear; is
> there any reason you have to oppose that?

Yes, there's a problem. Yes, it's "a gaping hole in the democratic safety"
or whatever you want to call it. At the moment, I believe ctte could
do almost whatever they want, apart from a narrow situation at the AGM.
We've seen it try before.

No, the constitution doesn't need amending. It was always expected to
work in tandem with standing orders.  The proper move with the current
constitution is to adopt election rules as standing orders, like many
other organisations. Adding all election rules into the constitution is
a bug which could box AFFS into precisely the sort of dead-end paralysis
you describe.

> I strongly believe the constitution allows AGM-only elections [...]

I disagree that the current constitution forces that to be the only
election. All it forces is an election to happen at AGM and it has
a "last resort" method which should not be tampered with.

-- 
MJR/slef