Joe, Would you please clarify your motion. Are you moving that all grievances submitted to the AB prior to your motion are included in this? That is the way I could read it. If that is not the case would you consider amending your motion to show just which grievances, and which submitter, your motion addresses. At the moment the motion appears to me to be a little too broad in it's scope and could be intrepreted to mean that any grievance submitted to this board is frivolous and therefore should be dismissed. My reasoning for this that there have been quite a few grievances submitted. None have been addressed that I'm aware of. Each grievance should be addressed seperately to determine the merits of each and I am still greatly concerned about addressing grievances filed against this board or members of it. I see no fair way we can address those ourselves. Thanks, Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com -----Original Message----- From: Betsy Mills <betsym@1starnet.com> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Saturday, June 03, 2000 2:38 PM Subject: [BOARD-L] Fwd: Motion 00-14 >Forwarding for Tim Stowell, as requested: > >>Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 12:33:07 -0700 (PDT) >>From: Tim Stowell <usgw1nc@yahoo.com> >>Subject: Motion 00-14 >> >> For background on the motion made by Joe seconded by >>Joy: >> >>"By submitting these grievances to the Board the >>"aggrieved" party(s) is/are invoking Section I of >>Article XIV which requests the Advisory Board to >>advise on issues related to grievances and appeals. My >>advice is that the grievances are purely spiteful and >>meant to disrupt and cause disarray among the Project >>members." >> >>The motion below is given the number 00-14. The floor >>is now open for discussion. >> >> >>"Therefore, I move that the grievances be dismissed as >>frivolous and purely political in nature." >> >>Tim >> >> >> >