RE: [registrars] Stepping down from the Constituency Chair nomination

["Rob Hall" <rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bob,
 
You should not be suggesting that Bhavin withdrawing from the race at the time of his choosing was somehow wrong or inappropriate.  Bhavin has served our constituency proudly for the last 2 years.  His reasons for withdrawal and the timing of his announcement are not for us to decide.  And I for one do not believe he has acted in a way to deliberately do harm to the constituency.  Just the opposite in fact.
 
As well, you keep claiming we have somehow lost something because we are no longer as geographically diverse as only US based people have stepped up to answer the call.
 
It only serves to diminish those that have put their name forward and are willing to VOLUNTEER to work on behalf of the constituency.  I can not support statements that lend themselves to somehow tarnishing the current nominees for volunteering just because they happen to live in the US.  You are basically suggesting the current slate is inappropriate in some way. 
 
I also believe opening the nominations because a candidate you supported withdrew would be wrong. The right to nominate is yours.  In fact, you could have nominated as many people as you wanted at anytime.    If you really thought geo diversity was such a huge issue, why did you not nominate anyone else during the nomination period ?
 
The right to accept the nomination or withdraw was solely Bhavins.  I would also point out that Bhavin had no need to actually withdraw.  He never accepted the nomination.  He took the high road to take the time to write us a letter and even explained some of his reasoning's.  But as of midnight last night, he was actually no longer a candidate as he had not accepted the nomination by the close of business.  He did absolutely nothing inappropriate
 
I also would point out that the current candidates must still get a minimum number of positive votes from the constituency to be elected.  If you feel the current candidates are not appropriate for whatever reason, you may exercise your right to vote against them.  If the will of the constituency agrees, then the current nominees will not be elected into the position.  It is the will of the constituency that will ultimately decide our officers.
 
We count on our secretary to know our bylaws and to enforce them without any personal bias.  To somehow try and use your position as secretary to re-open nominations because of your personal beliefs or your thinking that your nomination or vote was wasted is not appropriate.
 
 
 
Rob.
 
 

________________________________

From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Robert F. Connelly
Sent: Thu 27-Apr-06 8:59 PM
To: Registrars Constituency
Subject: RE: [registrars] Stepping down from the Constituency Chair nomination



At 03:11 PM 4/27/06, Tim Ruiz wrote:

>Bob, not sure what you meant in the above comment, but to be clear, all
>of the candidates have been seconded. And all except John Berryhill
>have accepted and posted their COI statements.

Dear Tim:  Oops, sorry about that.

<snip>

>Finally, Bhavin placed the deadline for nominations as 4/26/06. Not sure
>what the procedure would be to reopen it, or if there is one. But there
>isn't exactly an avalanche of interest.

It seems to me that Bhavin's act of withdrawing on *the_day_after* he
proposed closing nominations has some implications.  Our geographical
diversity depended upon his candidacy   *Bhavin* should therefore reopen
nominations.  Those who nominated and seconded his nomination, and those of
us who stood by silently and approved, deserve no less than that:

Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:19:18 +0530
Thank you Marcus and Richard for nominating me,

I have given this some thought, and had some discussions with Jon. I had
taken up the position of Chair after significant deliberation 2 years ago.

end quote:

Cordially, BobC