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

[MJ Ray]

Alex wrote:
> Well, I'm not sure why we should restrict ourselves to one election per
> year post an AGM; I would still prefer a situation where we can call an
> election whenever one is needed. [...]

Couldn't the committee already choose to use election rules
to select who is co-opted or who fills casual vacancies?

> The above would probably work, though. But it does pose one problem:
> honorary officers. We still cannot elect those without an AGM (5a), and
> one of those is our Treasurer. [...]

5a says "may elect" rather than must or will or anything. It's
only Secretary that has any constitutional role, so I'd only
prefix or dishonour(?) that one. Is it worth doing more?

> I would still like to remove "PROVIDED THAT ..." from 6d. too. Do you
> see any reason to keep it?

Is it necessary and if 6d is being edited, is it better to lose
everything following the "OR"?

-- 
MJR