[PC-NCSG] VC election

[David Cake]

Yes, I?m ok with any procedure that:
- acknowledges that, unless we are explicitly bound, an NCSG PC decision does not bind our councillors, so we need to individually state our position and
- includes the NCA.

While its a fairly terrible recipe for a long term solution, Wolf-Ulrichs suggestion does provide a method for moving forward from here.

David

> On 13 Nov 2015, at 4:02 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> 
> All,
> 
> Regarding the Vice Chair election, having spoken with David and
> others, my understanding at this point is that we could agree that
> 
> (1) one major problem with the SG-based election system is indeed the
> exclusion of the NCA, and that
> 
> (2) we want to come up with a better and well-documented procedure for
> the future, but
> 
> (3) due to time constraints we'll now agree to Wolf-Ulrich's
> suggestion and ask for Helsingius' opinion in addition to our
> councillors.
> 
> Any objections?
> 
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20151113/f2a2de95/attachment.sig>