----- Original Message ----- From: "Cyndie" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 12:11 PM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] The bylaw rule does exist <snip> That process never changed. The EC did contact the AB and the AB Reps were involved in contacting the involved parties. It was the AB's misunderstanding which included not recognizing where the original issue came from that precipitated this problem regardless of how often it was explained to them. I can unequivocally say that *no* member of this project was ever denied the right to vote and that the EC is not page police. They worked with the AB, SC's and project membership to assure that everyone was afforded the right to vote per the Bylaws and their operating procedures. They followed procedures to the letter often to much consternation from the body that approved their procedures. Tina >That process involves contacting the project > leadership and if need be contacting the AB and this process complies with > Section C. For some unknown reason, this process used to be followed, but > changed the past two years. > > Cyndie > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sherri > Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 9:44 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] The bylaw rule does exist > > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/BOARD/2009-01/1232156087 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jan Cortez > Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 9:12 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] The bylaw rule does exist > > Would some one be kind enough to lead me to the motion by the AB that > authorized the EC not to register CC's that did not display the approved > logo. Some how, I managed to miss that. > > Thanks, > > jic > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "MAK - Transcriber" <[email protected]> > > >> One of the real problems is the struggle for power. > >> Having been on the EC during the time we were "directed" by AB not to >> register CCs who did not display the approved logo - this was discussed >> extensively - not all of us had the same philosophy - so I can only speak >> for myself - while not having a logo is an administrative thing - it is >> my > >> understanding that the SC is the final authority of whether or not an >> individual was an official CC within the state - by putting the EC in the >> position of being the "logo police", IMHO, the EC was assigned >> responsibilities outside of the scope of their position, having the >> unfortunate affect of usurping the SCs authority. This was very >> frustrating from all points of view - and needs to be thoroughly >> discussed > >> before the next election. Personally, I strongly feel this IS the SC's >> job - and, they should be allowed to do their jobs without outside >> interference - unless they ask for help. > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message