Re: [council] FW: [ga] GA Adcom Election Committee

[Amadeu Abril i Abril <Amadeu@nominalia.com>]

Dennis Jennings wrote:
> 
> Joe,
> 
> I agree wholeheartedly with you.  The idea of a GA elected AdCom is
> completely at variance with the By Laws and it (the AdCom) will most likely
> attempt to usurp the role of the NC and its support staff (to be
> appointed).  This is a very bad idea that undermines the existing
> structures.

WARINING: NC members hsouldbe more ctive within GA list, and at lest
read it with care. Its part of our job.

I expressed my complete disagreement with that proposal. I pointed out
that an elected permennet chair (appoitned by the NC for one year)
what was required and what the Bylaws provided. I alos hinted that
chairing physical meetings could require more than one person, so
perhaps we could appoint NC members to help the elected Chair for that
matter in turns. And the "previous co-chair/co.-modertor" could help
with the next co-chair/moderator" to prepare he next physical mneeting.

This is all what's required.

But...


* NC reps comments are not exactly welcome
* The strategy seems to duplicat estrucutres, with GD ensrhined, all
along the line, no matter they make sense or not.
* Even NC presnece and work within GA is discouraged....
> 
> I wonder what problem / requirement is being asserted here ?
> 
For some of them , probably not the majority, a simple attempt to
undrmine the current strucutre and balance.

For many of those who participated in the discussion, a simple
misunderstanding fo the DNSO. We do have consituencies, a GA working
thru WGs, a NC to manage the consenus process, and the GA being in
faxt the expression of all this together.

Many acitve participants in the GA list seem to believe (and to
support) that the GA is "what's left" when you take off NCm
Consituencies and WGs, instead of the meeting of all these
goups(bodies (and more).

Finally, there is a frantic need to multiply jobs, offices and
honours: NC members and Board Membrs, plus GA chair¡ but then we have
AfVoms for each consituency, with alternates and secrtaries, then each
WG needas at least two chairs...and now more Adcoms.

I propose that we think about a special Committee for all those left
out without any office to hold. It would be the less numerous group by
far ;-)))

Amadeu