[NCUC-EC] Conduct of the NCUC Election

[Tapani Tarvainen]

On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 12:39:49PM +0200, William Drake (wjdrake at gmail.com) wrote:

> On Oct 5, 2013, at 10:31 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote:
> > 
> > Alternatively, since NCUC membership is by definition a subset
> > of NCSG membership, we could use NCSG's check, i.e., define
> > an NCUC member to be in good standing if they're so in NCSG.

> We've not done that before

Has any previous EC ever defined rules for members to maintain
their good standing (as required by Bylaws III F)?
If not, it falls on us.
And it seems to be the obvious rule would be to equate it
with good standing in the NCSG.

> and NCUC members who didn't respond to Robin's NCSG check in had no
> expectation that they'd be disqualified from voting in the NCUC
> election as well.

Actually, based on a huge sample of three, 100% of them did. :-)

But, do you really believe there're many members who don't care about NCSG
even enough to maintain their good standing there yet would want to
vote on NCUC elections? I doubt there're any, and of course we would
give them a chance to protest and be included anyway.

The alternatives are not quite simple either.

While we do have contact information for all members, we don't know if
they work - indeed it's all but certain that some of them don't
work or are otherwise wrong.

And there's no way to know that short of sending mail there and
waiting for a reply, i.e, what Robin has done with NCSG.
We could do that, or we could do it with only those who didn't
reply to Robin. Or we could just send a general message that we'll
default to NCSG's check and anybody who missed that, let us know.

But just using the addresses we have in the database without any check
at all would not match my notions of good governance.

> I don't see what the advantage would be of potentially
> disenfranchising and annoying members and then having to back track
> and figure out a solution on the listserv.

I'm not sure what you mean by "on the listserv" (which, incidentally,
is a trademarked product we don't use, I presume you mean mailing list),
but according to our bylaws is up to the EC to define rules for
members' good standing, nobody else. Of course we can bring this up
on the ncuc-discuss list and listen to opinions there, but in the
end it's up to us to decide.

(Incidentally, some 40 members have unsubscribed ncuc-discuss
since it was launched. So it doesn't reach everybody either.)

> Glad to hear your data base has all the emails and is clear on org
> size etc, should make things operationally a lot more manageable. We
> just need to get it in shape

What does "getting it in shape" mean if not somehow checking
the contact information (email addresses)?

> then to send to Glen to input into their system.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen