Regarding the motion and accompanying details made by Joe and seconded by Maggie: While I have a concern that a few worthy CCs may not get to vote this time. I would bet you a dime to a bagel that if they feel as strongly about this Project as I do they would gracefully give up the vote so that the other several hundred voting members would feel that their vote fell where they aimed it to fall. Tell me, dear friends, is it more right that one voter or a few voters be denied than for the hundreds that part with their apathy and vote be denied their due rights? I think not. Remember last time when ten votes separated the runoff for the NC position? Eleven more phony votes would have disenfrancised a true majority. Keep this in mind if nit picking starts over the motion below. Until just a few days ago I sided with those who protested the April 1, 2000 date. I am quite naive at times believing that all feel as I do about honesty and such. But the evidence will continue to mount that the motion below is the right course to take. And remember, this Board and any Board has the right and duty to make motions not specifically prohibited by the ByLaws. I hereby move that the April 1, 2000 cutoff date be affirmed. ------ it is now given Motion number 00-18. The floor is now open for discussion on this. Tim