[sudo-discuss] Constable amendment changes

[Anthony Di Franco]

In the first case, I do not necessarily dispute that a majority vote
overrules the facilitator, but I do not know where that is said to be able
to happen (unless you are talking about replacing the facilitator with a
new one, which is different and a bit more weighty). What were you thinking
of?
On Mar 7, 2013 2:49 AM, "Matthew Senate" <mattsenate at gmail.com> wrote:

> hey all,
>
> here are the changes I described in the mtg tonight:
> http://sudoroom.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Articles_of_Association%2FConstable&diff=2637&oldid=2635
>
> This page's history has:
> (a) the current Articles
> (b) the proposal from tonight
> (c) my proposed changes
>
> // Matt
>
> p.s.
>
> I left out some bits about Facilitator and Exchequer, but the rest is
> mainly re-worded, reduced, and refined. The omitted pieces (due to
> unnecessary  in the first case since majority vote already over-rules
> facilitator, and too specific for the second case):
>
> Facilitator:
>
> ** Uses own best judgment to resolve ambiguity in the Articles of
> Association about how business is handled in meetings, but may be
> challenged in this by anyone who does not consent, which results in a
> majority vote on sustaining or overturning the Facilitator's judgment.
>
> Exchequer:
>
> ** Receives dues and donations and pays expenses on behalf of the group,
> using the group's accounts.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130307/cecd5876/attachment.html>