[PC-NCSG] Vice Chair elections

[Tapani Tarvainen]

Hi Ed,

I like the way you put it, but to clarify which choice is which
(I should have labeled them better):

Option 1 (no VC) was intended to be pressure-only choice and
option 2 (keep alternating or resort to NCA) would be the
keep-council-functional-while-we-fight -choice.

Is that what you meant?

Tapani

On Nov 07 07:12, Edward Morris (egmorris1 at toast.net) wrote:

> I look at point 12 less than as a pressure point than as a sorry desperate move to ensure Council
> functions during the period of dispute. It isn't fair to the Chair or presumably the other Vice Chair to  not have some help in preparing for the next meeting, which in most cases will be by teleconference. 
> 
> I do understand and respect Avri's view and that in fact might be the way to go. I'd suggest basing the decision on what the purpose of point 12 is: is it to ensure the Council functions during time of a protracted dispute or is it to apply pressure to the process? If the former option 1 would be the best choice, if the later option 2.
> 
> Ed
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On 6 Nov 2016, at 14:15, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> > 
> > FYI: CSG accepts whichever of the two alternatives for step 12 we
> > want. If we can agree on it that is. :-)
> > 
> > To recap, the choices were like this:
> > 
> > "
> > 12. If no agreement is reached in time for a council meeting,
> > 
> > [there will be no NCPH Vice Chair in that meeting]
> > 
> > [the non-incumbent SG nominates VC candidate for that meeting only,
> > the other SG may only reject the candidate in favour of the NCA;
> > should the situation reoccur, the nomination would alternate
> > between SGs from meeting to meeting]
> > "
> > 
> > Opinions?
> > 
> > Tapani
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Forwarded message from tonyarholmes <tonyarholmes at btinternet.com> -----
> > 
> > Dear Tapani
> > 
> > First, thanks for the constructive discussion during this morning's NCPH
> > meeting. Within the CSG we have since discussed how best to progress the
> > remaining unresolved issue on point 12 and reach conclusion. 
> > 
> > 
> > The CSG would therefore like to propose that  the NCSG selects its preferred
> > approach on Point 12 and we would be willing to concur with that choice.
> > 
> > 
> > Could you please let us know your decision.
> > 
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > Tony
> > 
> > ----- End forwarded message -----