I also disagree. For pretty much the same reasons. Alice NENC CC Rep *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 4/22/2010 at 7:30 AM [email protected] wrote: >I don't think two days is sufficient time to allow for discussion. I >disagree. > > >Dale Grimm > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >Behalf Of Sherri >Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 6:02 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [BOARD] MOTION 2009/10-23 - Call the Question > >The question has been called on Motion 2009/10-23 by Tina Vickery and >seconded by Jeff Kemp. As stated below by Tina, a 2/3 majority is required >to pass, which would call for an immediate vote on the motion being >discussed. > >Please signify your response to the Calling of the Question by either >"agree" (which would indicate that your choice is that a vote on Motion >2009/10-23 would be taken immediately) or "disagree" (which would indicate >that discussion should continue on Motion 2009/10-23). > > >Sherri Bradley >National Coordinator >USGenWeb Project >Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory >Board >Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php >