[Linux-aus] LA constitution/election/terms/ctte/handover change proposal

Silvia Pfeiffer silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com
Fri Aug 8 17:49:28 EST 2008

On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Alan Harper <alan at aussiegeek.net> wrote:
>> 4) People are elected onto the council, NOT into a position.
>>   They can sort out for themselves if they want to be on the
>>   executive or not. This helps the council be more flexible
>>   if someone should become unavailable.
> Without reading the relevant legal paperwork (which may already cover
> this), what about electing to positions, but allowing any position
> that becomes vacant to be filled by vote of the commitee, and that
> person may be an existing committee member or an external person

The model rules for Associations are written in exactly that way, so
the council already has all the freedom it needs right there to
replace people. Whether it makes use of them or not is a different

I actually think it does not matter whether somebody is elected for a
certain position or just a council member, as long as they get the job
done that is expected from the council.

And further to Peter's suggestion: I actually believe that electing
the president is important for the community - it is important to
elect the face that represents us. The other positions are not as
relevant to actually decide on individuals. But it is good to list the
positions and therefore to list the tasks that are necessary to be

Thus, I am against dropping positions (not a strong opposition, just a
practical one). Dropping them obfuscates the work that needs to be
done in the council and the exposure that certain people get. Further,
dropping positions does not help solve the stated problem that a
person that become unavailable needs to be replaced. Existing rules
already are sufficient. They just have to be made use of.


More information about the linux-aus mailing list