Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!camb.com!lmrc!hassinger
Newsgroups: comp.org.decus
Subject: Re: DECUS By-law change election results
Message-ID: <13260@lmrc.uucp>
From: hassinger@lmrc.uucp (Bob Hassinger)
Date: 4 Jun 91 12:43:06 GMT
References: <1991May29.170715.1386@spcvxb.spc.edu> <1991May31.120421.506@dragon.com>
Organization: Liberty Mutual Research Center, Hopkinton, MA
Lines: 28

In article <1991May31.120421.506@dragon.com>, cts@dragon.com (Charles T. Smith, Jr.) writes:
>> The votes have been counted and verified for the special
>> election.  The referendum needed a two-thirds vote for
>> the bylaw changes in order to pass.  The referendum, as
>> the figures below dictate, has failed to pass.
> 
> Now that this little issue has been settled, perhaps its time for
> another bylaw change - one that will allow a recall election
> for the Board of Directors.  
> 
> Given what I've heard about how some members of the board have
> conducted themselves in this affair, and how they have refused to
> discuss the issue, I am not at all certain they should continue
> to (in theory) lead Decus.

As a matter of fact the idea of a recall provision _was_ proposed during the
leadership discussion of the Board's proposed by-law change.  Many leaders
asked that a provision for recall be added to the proposal and argued for it
energetically.  Characteristically it was largely a one sided "discussion" with
little involvement from the Board.  In its wisdom the present Board eventually
concluded it would not add such a provision to the proposal.

A good case can be made that this was "a", and maybe "the", pivotal issue that
lead to the defeat of the by-law proposal.  I suspect that an acceptable
accommodation by the Board of this request would have de-fused enough of the
opposition to have gained voter approval of the package.

Bob Hassinger