Re: [council] Term limits

[Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ross,
     Let me amplify my point.  I am simply saying that it should be up
to each constituency alone to decide who may or may not represent it. 
I do not believe it is appropriate for anyone outside the ISPs to tell
us whom we can choose to represent us in the Council; that would be
tantamount to exerting control over our constituency.

Greg 

--- Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Greg Ruth wrote:
> > Philip et al,
> >     Whether we are "leaping" or not, I agree we should have a
> > discussion.  And I believe it can start now, on this list.  My
> opinion
> > is that, except in the case of NomCom appointees (who represent no
> > constituency), the matter of term limits should be left for each
> > constituency to decide for itself.
> 
> My personal view is that the Council and the Board should decide how 
> this group is constituted in order that the basic foundations for our
> 
> processes and outcomes are stable and predictable. I don't think that
> 
> this is a constituency decision any more than it is a constituency 
> decision regarding how many reps from each constituency sit on the 
> Council, or the term of those seats, etc.
> 
>  From my perspective, the first question that we should be looking at
> is 
> whether or no term limits are desirable. The second question is whose
> 
> responsibility it is to implement them (or not). (i.e. if limits are 
> desirable, then is this a board, council or constituency decision?).
> 
> -ross
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com