|
Grex > Coop6 > #58: New Nominations for the 1995-96 board | |
|
| Author |
Message |
popcorn
|
|
New Nominations for the 1995-96 board
| 
Dec 19 15:37 UTC 1994 |
Since the first election for the 1995-96 board didn't make quorum,
we may need to nominate candidates and vote again. To get the ball
rolling for nominations, I'm entering this item.
Please enter nominations for the 3 open seats on Grex's 1995-96
board of directors here.
|
| 80 responses total. |
popcorn
|
|
response 1 of 80:
|
Dec 19 15:39 UTC 1994 |
I nominate: carl, popcorn, robh, scg, srw, and wh.
|
robh
|
|
response 2 of 80:
|
Dec 20 00:33 UTC 1994 |
Thanks, popcorn. I accept.
|
scg
|
|
response 3 of 80:
|
Dec 20 05:33 UTC 1994 |
I accept too. In fact, I was just about to make that set of nominations.
|
nephi
|
|
response 4 of 80:
|
Dec 20 09:22 UTC 1994 |
I second the nomination for popcorn.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 5 of 80:
|
Dec 20 13:30 UTC 1994 |
Thanks nephi. :)
|
chelsea
|
|
response 6 of 80:
|
Dec 20 13:40 UTC 1994 |
I believe Bill Hosmon left town early yesterday morning and will
be gone for a couple of weeks. He had some urgent family business
to attend to.
|
srw
|
|
response 7 of 80:
|
Dec 21 04:36 UTC 1994 |
At this point we have no election scheduled. I am not sure if these
nominations are appropriate. If it turns out that they are, then I will
accept also. I suspect Bill Hosmon will have plenty of time to decide
after he returns.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 8 of 80:
|
Dec 21 06:38 UTC 1994 |
It can be moved at the board meeting to schedule a new election for
immediately following the bylaw amendment vote (win or lose). Nominations
would then be "officially" acceptable. But anyone can say "I nominate
........" at any time, for anything: just might have to repeat it. This is
not a big thing.
|
carson
|
|
response 9 of 80:
|
Dec 21 10:41 UTC 1994 |
"I nominate ........"
yep, sure can.
|
carl
|
|
response 10 of 80:
|
Dec 25 13:45 UTC 1994 |
I accept the nomination.
|
andyv
|
|
response 11 of 80:
|
Dec 28 16:01 UTC 1994 |
Well Bill, do you accept? Popcorn, I assumed you accepted since you nominated
yourself ;-)
|
remmers
|
|
response 12 of 80:
|
Dec 29 14:11 UTC 1994 |
Bill's probably still out of town, as indicated in #6. I think it's a
reasonable default assumption that he accepts.
|
carson
|
|
response 13 of 80:
|
Dec 31 07:11 UTC 1994 |
whoah. are these nominations legit?
|
remmers
|
|
response 14 of 80:
|
Dec 31 13:07 UTC 1994 |
The board passed a motion scheduling a new election starting January
15. For normal board elections, the bylaws specify a nomination period
ending November 15 followed by an election beginning December 1, so a
nomination period ending December 31 for the new election would at
least be consistent with that. The bylaws language is in terms of
specific dates though, and the board motion to hold a new election
doesn't speak to nominations at all.
Although I'm not sure what the parliamentary fine points would be, I
personally think it's a reasonable default assumption that anybody who
was a candidate in the December election is automatically a candidate
in the new election unless they explicitly withdraw, so re-nominating
people who already ran may not be necessary.
I'm not sure what the status would be of nominations of new candidates
after Dec. 31.
|
srw
|
|
response 15 of 80:
|
Dec 31 18:04 UTC 1994 |
I can't say what was in the other board members' minds when they voted for
the motion, but I was thinking exactly that, John. This election is
just shifted in time, so the nomination period should end as always,
15 days before the election begins. That is my opinion only.
The candidates who have been nominated and accepted (including myself)
are the same ones as in the failed election.
|
carson
|
|
response 16 of 80:
|
Jan 2 13:01 UTC 1995 |
at what point are we to nominate other parties?
|
scg
|
|
response 17 of 80:
|
Jan 2 20:48 UTC 1995 |
You can nominate others at any time, as long as the nominations are
continuing, I think.
|
danr
|
|
response 18 of 80:
|
Jan 3 00:06 UTC 1995 |
Are the nominations still open? If so, I'd like to nominate Kent
Nassen, login kentn.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 19 of 80:
|
Jan 4 08:47 UTC 1995 |
Cool idea! I second the nomination.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 20 of 80:
|
Jan 4 20:13 UTC 1995 |
(For the record, but not that it matters much, nominations, by RRO, do
not require seconds, on the premise that the nominee constitutes the
second person in favor of the nomination. However you hear nominations
being seconded at political conventions because a) they are really
paeans for the nominees and, b) politicians like to hear themselves
talk.)
|
kentn
|
|
response 21 of 80:
|
Jan 5 00:06 UTC 1995 |
Hmmm...well I'll accept the nomination if it's a cool idea...
|
remmers
|
|
response 22 of 80:
|
Jan 5 05:11 UTC 1995 |
In a regular election, nominations end two weeks before the election
begins. This isn't a regular election, of course. But if we're still
accepting nominations at this point, we probably ought to have a
concensus as to when the nominations will close. Thoughts?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 23 of 80:
|
Jan 5 05:45 UTC 1995 |
How about, midnight, Sunday, 8 January?
|
popcorn
|
|
response 24 of 80:
|
Jan 6 02:32 UTC 1995 |
I second that suggestion, too. :)
|