You mean like the whole Chuck thing? Ask all your new constituents if they want to wait until the next SScene to find out about what happened? Betcha I know the answer... </font>[/QUOTE]Until the board minutes are approved, there will be no official statement or position anyways. We've both read that. I would also speculate that given the fact that the president has recently appointed a Public Relations Officer, it will be his resposibility to to release whatever statment is made.Originally posted by Big Kahuna:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by -dW:
Honestly, there's not a whole lot that happens at the BoD level that you can't wait until the next SScene to find out about
I also think we should be prepared for the possibility that there will be no reasons given for Chuck's sanction other than to defend the actions of the board as having acted within the powers given them in the by laws. Often times the details of personnel actions cannot and should not be shared for obvious reasons. ISSCA needs to show that they were acting within their established by laws, which includes Roberts Rules of Order.
I personally question, given what I've read by the few people with first hand knowledge that have posted, whether the by laws were correctly interpreted but I don't think it should be up to a trial of popular opinion whether or not Chuck's actions or behavior warranted the action. I don't believe that I would have voted in favor of the motion unless there is a whole lot more to this than I suspect, and I certainly understand the reaction of those in the general membership that have spoken out.