[ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

In a message to the NC list, Joe Sims speaks from a legal standpoint,
regarding the GA, its Chair, and their relation to the NC:

(from http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc03/msg00072.html)

"Since the GA Chair is an arm of the NC used to carry out the NC's
management responsibilities with respect to the GA, it is not correct
to view this process as being required to be either truly electoral or
representative."


So, the GA Chair is a tool for the top-down control of the GA, and
the NC can put whoever they want in that position.


In another message, Theresa Swinehart outlines what appears to
be the consensus for the NC as to how they are going to run this
process:

(from http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc03/msg00094.html ,
 dated Monday Nov 15, 1999)

   "1) The NC will accept a list of 5 nominated names which the GA has
   selected.

   2) The NC expects the GA membership to indicate its level of support
   for these nominees (e.g., endorsements).

   3) The NC expects to have a short background, and statement of purpose
   and objectives the nominee in the role as Chair of the GA. This should
   include: what the nominee can do for the GA and its role in the DNSO;
   how they intend to interact with the NC and the 7 constituencies
   within the DNSO; and anything else the nominee considers important."

So the NC had already determined, as early as last Monday, which proposal
they're going to accept.

I fail to see any bottom-up processes inherent in any of this.


-- 
Mark C. Langston
mark@bitshift.org
Systems Admin
San Jose, CA