(07-04-2022, 09:14 AM)Ianbrownlee Wrote: "Let's not get hung up on a word. I'm just using the term descriptively, I don't want to keep listing people's names. I've used 'senior officials', 'top officials' as well. It's the highest ranking figures in CS.
(Eg here, 3/4 of the Exec + grader, their support for these ideas goes back years - no-one else in management has commented)."
as a quarter or the executive committee I haven't disclosed any indication on how I've voted. Maybe or maybe not I will tell anyone who asks me face to face how I voted, but not on the forum.
As Andy says "his is not a management vote, I really don't know why you think it is. It is a vote on the proposals that came from the EWP. Management/Exec board have not formulated the motions, they came from the EWP. " As a former member of the EWP I do not understand what you dont understand this, given your former position on the EWP board.
I'm also curious why on the one hand you criticise me for posting my position (albeit vague when it comes to the voting) and criticise others on the management board for not posting. I've already posted a very reason why they probably haven't. A few brave souls have posted which is a very small percentage of the membership. It seems to me unposted CS members either are afraid to post or apathetic to the issue
If you trace it back this is about Motion 1. How you vote on Motion 1 is irrelevant to the issue that it places new criteria straight into the rules (lifelong eligibility from a temporary residency, eg student), bypassing the membership.
How you actually vote on Motion 1 is not relevant to this 'membership bypass' that it has already established.
"As Andy says "his is not a management vote, I really don't know why you think it is. It is a vote on the proposals that came from the EWP. Management/Exec board have not formulated the motions, they came from the EWP. " As a former member of the EWP I do not understand what you dont understand this, given your former position on the EWP board"
See 1) and 2). Which one are you saying is difficult to understand?
Again, briefly, (i) the EWP did not propose a membership bypass a la Motion1; (ii) it was stressed that what was being proposed in the discussions isn't final, it will be put to the members. There are references all over the place to the SGM or AGM at which final decisions would take place.
And references to general meetings are all over the constitution too.
"I'm also curious why on the one hand you criticise me for posting my position (albeit vague when it comes to the voting) and criticise others on the management board for not posting. I've already posted a very reason why they probably haven't. A few brave souls have posted which is a very small percentage of the membership. "
You seem to have lost a bit of the detail here - I don't be1ieve I have ever 'criticized' anyone for just 'posting'.
"It seems to me unposted CS members either are afraid to post or apathetic to the issue"
Are you developing your own theme here - though the personal attacks and digs in this thread have all come from 3/4 of the exec, most of them have been from just the one exec member
