Re: [Computerbank] Re: [cai-vic] What happened at the AGM?

["Robert Mead" <meadr@useoz.com.au>]

Interesting reading the messages re the AGM, I was not aware of another channel for discussion by some of the members and I was not advised of one but if I had I would have made mention that it was very unethical and deplorable . The AGM was not run in a efficient or legal manner for all and sundry to have a say. I for one would have liked to have seen the proxies to ensure that they were legal and correct(ie Name of member and who the proxy was for) 

Regards 

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 27/11/2002 at 1:30 PM Shaun Branden wrote:

>On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:10:30PM +1030, Romana Challans wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 03:51 pm, Kylie Davies shared:
>> > Daniel Stone wrote:
>> > > The conclusion was that Grant was the new president, however most of
>the
>> > > stuff at the meeting was seriously unconstitutional, and I wouldn't
>be
>> > > surpised to see it all happen again due to protests. It was a
>complete
>> > > stuff-up.
>> >
>> > I am glad that you said it. :)
>> >
>> > The other thing which probably makes the conduct of the meeting a bit
>> > "grey" was the fact that certain members to the AGM (ie cbnsw/cbsa/some
>> > of cb-vic) were also in another channel called #backstabbers (sounds
>> > awful doesnt it?) This channel was a private channel and unless you
>knew
>> > the operators you couldnt join.
>> >
>> > Now I am pretty sure that If you are going to attend one meeting - you
>> > can not participate in another.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Kylie
>> 
>> hmm, as it was #meta-backstabbers kylie, i think you got the intention
>of the 
>> channel completely awry. i understand your personal slant on this, of
>course.
>> 
>> as the meeting was in #cbmeta, the channel afaik was intended to allow
>people 
>> to vent steam and try and remove the sillier behaviour off the meeting 
>> channel - perhaps the choice of name was unfortunate, but certainly, as
>a 
>> participant, nothing of what you imply was in evidence.
>
>So I gather everyone was invited to this channel and you won't mind
>posting the un-edited logs for us all to see.
>
>Perhaps it is just my twisted imagination, but i imagine that this
>channel was used by the members to guarentee a victory one way or the
>other.
>
>I have this vision of Craige telling Grant "Don't worry, lets put
>everyone out and sign me up, then I will vote for you- you can't lose".
>
>Again, this is just my imagination, and may not have happend, but having
>private convos during a agm is really bad form.
>
>> it was not a meeting channel, more like a whispered aside during the
>meeting. 
>> there is no rule about that.
>
>Sorry, my hearing must be worse than I thought, I didn't hear a thing.
>
>> btw, i prefer my grapes sweeter.
>
>Nice dig. you really should encourage debate, not attack those that
>built this thing up in the first place.
>
>shaun
>_______________________________________________
>The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the individual, and do
>not 
>express the opinions of Computerbank Australia Incorporated (CAI) in any
>way.
>_______________________________________________
>
>computerbank mailing list
>computerbank@lists.linux.org.au
>http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/computerbank
>Web page: http://www.computerbank.org.au





_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the individual, and do not 
express the opinions of Computerbank Australia Incorporated (CAI) in any way.
_______________________________________________

computerbank mailing list
computerbank@lists.linux.org.au
http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/computerbank
Web page: http://www.computerbank.org.au