<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7654.12">
<TITLE>Re: Proposed disposition - Re: Sinclair comments - Members review of Draft Proposed NCSG Charter</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>Looks workable to me<br/><br/>Rosemary<p>Sent from my BlackBerry® from Optus</p><hr/><div><b>From: </b> "Milton L Mueller" <mueller@SYR.EDU>
</div><div><b>Date: </b>Wed, 5 May 2010 23:30:14 +1000</div><div><b>To: </b><NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU></div><div><b>Subject: </b>Re: Proposed disposition - Re: Sinclair comments - Members review of Draft Proposed NCSG Charter</div><div><br/></div>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> What I wanted to ensure was that my right to individual membership is<BR>
> not over-ridden by my status as employee/member of an organisation.<BR>
> This could be fixed by separating out three types of membership:<BR>
<BR>
OK, I get it. I support this.<BR>
<BR>
> Class 2 can be limited by decision of the EC to a maximum number of<BR>
> individuals representing any particular organisation and denied for<BR>
> anyone whose organisation is in Class 1. However, individual membership under<BR>
> class 3 is still allowed, even where an individual happens to be an<BR>
> employee/member of an NCSG member organisation.<BR>
<BR>
Does this language work for you? Our concern is that a large organization might try to "take over" by ordering its employees or members to join as individuals. This "threat" has always been purely hypothetical and some have been more worried about it than others. So we've put in a check by the EC in case something fishy seems to be up.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>