[Lnc-business] status of call for electronic meeting

[Joshua Katz]

I will join the other one too.  I believe we have until midnight Pacific to
get joiners. It's not clear to me that the mere presence of an email ballot
means that past statements of joining in a call are not meaningful - if
that's the case, every call for an electronic meeting can be killed by 4
people putting an email ballot together on the limine of the required
notice time.  However, in this instance, where there was no past agreement
on time and date, I would agree that support cannot be inferred.

Joshua A. Katz


On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:31 PM, Alicia Mattson <alicia.mattson at lp.org>
wrote:

>    From the policy manual, "Each committee member calling for an
>    electronic meeting must do so by emailing the entire committee and
>    specifying the date of the meeting, time of the meeting, and the
>    topic(s) to be addressed.  Meetings must be so called no fewer than 2
>    days in advance for committees with fewer than 10 members, or 7 days in
>    advance for committees with 10 or more members."
>    The call needs to include 1) date, 2) time, and 3) topic(s) to be
>    addressed.
>    Previously there were six people requesting an electronic meeting for a
>    topic (suspension of VC Vohra- previously moved by both McKnight and
>    Van Horn), but there was no date/time specified.  Those people were:
>    Harlos, Katz, Redpath, Goldstein, McKnight, Van Horn.
>    Now there is a date/time specified (on a thread which implies the topic
>    is suspension of the Vice Chair), but since there is a
>    sufficiently-sponsored email ballot on a related topic I cannot just
>    assume that the same people are willing to still sponsor the call of
>    the meeting under different circumstances.  I have a lot of email
>    clutter today, but so far I believe I have seen the following people
>    join meeting calls:
>    01/28/17 at 10:00 p.m. Eastern (Harlos, Katz)
>    10/28/17 at 9:00 p.m. Eastern (Harlos, Hagan)
>    As a parliamentary matter, scope of notice rules would allow a meeting
>    called to consider suspension to also consider a lesser action such as
>    censure.  The scope of notice covers anything in the range between the
>    status quo and the proposed action which was noticed.
>    -Alicia
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
   I will join the other one too.  I believe we have until midnight
   Pacific to get joiners. It's not clear to me that the mere presence of
   an email ballot means that past statements of joining in a call are not
   meaningful - if that's the case, every call for an electronic meeting
   can be killed by 4 people putting an email ballot together on the
   limine of the required notice time.  However, in this instance, where
   there was no past agreement on time and date, I would agree that
   support cannot be inferred.

   Joshua A. Katz
   On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:31 PM, Alicia Mattson
   <[1]alicia.mattson at lp.org> wrote:

        From the policy manual, "Each committee member calling for an
        electronic meeting must do so by emailing the entire committee
     and
        specifying the date of the meeting, time of the meeting, and the
        topic(s) to be addressed.  Meetings must be so called no fewer
     than 2
        days in advance for committees with fewer than 10 members, or 7
     days in
        advance for committees with 10 or more members."
        The call needs to include 1) date, 2) time, and 3) topic(s) to be
        addressed.
        Previously there were six people requesting an electronic meeting
     for a
        topic (suspension of VC Vohra- previously moved by both McKnight
     and
        Van Horn), but there was no date/time specified.  Those people
     were:
        Harlos, Katz, Redpath, Goldstein, McKnight, Van Horn.
        Now there is a date/time specified (on a thread which implies the
     topic
        is suspension of the Vice Chair), but since there is a
        sufficiently-sponsored email ballot on a related topic I cannot
     just
        assume that the same people are willing to still sponsor the call
     of
        the meeting under different circumstances.  I have a lot of email
        clutter today, but so far I believe I have seen the following
     people
        join meeting calls:
        01/28/17 at 10:00 p.m. Eastern (Harlos, Katz)
        10/28/17 at 9:00 p.m. Eastern (Harlos, Hagan)
        As a parliamentary matter, scope of notice rules would allow a
     meeting
        called to consider suspension to also consider a lesser action
     such as
        censure.  The scope of notice covers anything in the range
     between the
        status quo and the proposed action which was noticed.
        -Alicia
     _______________________________________________
     Lnc-business mailing list
     [2]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     [3]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business

References

   1. mailto:alicia.mattson at lp.org
   2. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   3. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business