On Wed, September 4, 2013 5:34 pm, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
Sounds to me that the committee is pissed that this didn't get up.
The committee offered no recommendation on this motion; and that was a considered decision. As should have been obvious by the vote on the night there were some members of the committee who were opposed to disincorporation (Les and Daniel), some who supported it (Andrew and Russell), who respectively spoke for and against the motion. I can't really remember how the others voted; I suspect the majority were against. As chairperson, I didn't vote at all.
My view is that this topic deserves to be finalized right here, why should it be relegated to luv-talk where the topic never entered and where it could be buried because the committee doesn't want to resolve this fully?
Because I suspect most people who prefer to return to a technical discussion as the primary consumer of bandwidth on luv-main. The issue actually is finalised until the next time a motion is on the agenda for a general, special, or annual general meeting. Everything else is talk. Regards, -- Lev Lafayette, BA (Hons), GCertPM, MBA mobile: 0432 255 208 RFC 1855 Netiquette Guidelines http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt