Let me first of all say that I don't think the current exec is simply
trying to keep the power, and that Roland's intentions in posting the
proposed amendments that he did are to stablise Progsoc.
However, I think the appropriate way to deal with introducing such rules
might be to bring in a motion to have the changes to the constitution
described effected at the AGM BEFORE a vote for the exec. If the
membership votes at the meeting that the amendments are a good idea, they
should apply for the subsequent vote.
In this way, changes could be brought in "democratically" and could no
longer be seen as a defence mechanism for the current exec, and the
membership could decide. This of course assumes 2 things :-
1) That enough people interested in seeing Progsoc remain stable show up at
the AGM to counter any vote "stacking" by any small group.
2) That the current constitution would allow for such a change before the
new exec is voted in.
The fact is, if the majority of people that are interested in keeping
Progsoc going are so rash that they're going to damage the organization,
then it's doomed to failure anyway. The only question is when it should be
allowed to fail, this year or next. Whichever people hold official office
in Progsoc, if I see it die this year it'll sadden me deeply, but if that's
what's meant to happen so be it.
I also think two 6-month terms are more realistic given the structure of
the courses at UTS (ie industrial training and a large number of mature age
and/or part time students) Two year terms are definitely too long.
These are just my thoughts on the matter, but I think they're reasonable
and well thought out.
Oh lookie! I've disagreed with an exec decision (and publicly too). Geez
and I thought I was "Progsoc people". I can't speak for anyone else but
Whoever gets in, they aren't going to have _my_ unconditional support on
any matter (to whatever extent I get involved), nor should they. On the
other hand, I'm not going to disagree in a way that will damage progsoc or
disrespect/show ingratitude for anyone if I can help it. Each thinking
person in Progsoc should consider what is and isn't in the interests of the
organization as they see things.
Roland, I'd welcome any comments on what I've said, particularly whether or
not it would be constitutional to bring your proposed changes in just prior
to the vote.
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| Sammy Yousef | Email: syousef@nospam.socs.uts.edu.au |
| | URL: http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/~sammy |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, |
| Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." |
| - Hamlet Act I, Scene V |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
-
You are subscribed to the progsoc mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a
message containing "unsubscribe" to progsoc-request@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au.