Angie, You didn't need to be so subtle....yes, that statement about the EC making an unenforceable rule was made by me. I made it. I stand by it. And, while the proposed procedures may pass, as of now, I will be standing with Jan and voting "NO" and this isn't the only reason why. Since the EC is proposing these revised procedures; since the EC wants the Project members to believe that the EC members adhere to higher standards than anyone else; and since the purpose of the formation of the EC to begin with was to take away any political influence the AB might have on the EC......it is only logical that the EC should put a rule in its procedures that no AB member could serve as a worker on the EC because if an AB member is a worker on the EC, that worker is not living up to the higher standards of the EC being free of possible political influence from the AB. Phyllis Rippee SW/SC CC Representative

I don't want anyone to get me wrong -- I would prefer that AB members not be on the EC. Where I have an issue is with what appears to me to be a lack of logic. The EC has proposed a change that they believe would adequately close the "loophole." Some people agree that their proposal is adequate, some do not. I don't see the logic in *not* passing the current proposal because you'd like them to have stronger rules -- how is it better to have no restrictions at all? And my second point still stands. There is absolutely no reason that the AB cannot have their own procedural rule forbidding AB members from serving on the EC. In fact, to me, it would be preferable. It the AB does not believe their members can serve on the EC without creating an appearance of a conflict of interest (and I agree that it gives a bad appearance), then the AB should should create such a rule, rather than waiting for another committee to decide to do things the AB's way. I have no problem with the AB setting rules & standards for its members. I *do* have a problem with the AB getting involved in the internal workings of the EC. Why? It sets a bad precedent. If it's OK for the AB to make rules about who the EC can consider for membership, what other decisions can the AB make for them? It defeats the purpose of setting up a separate committee to handle election activities -- you might as well have the AB run elections themselves. Sure, it looks bad, but what the heck, right? Angie >-----Original Message----- >Since the EC is proposing these revised procedures; since the >EC wants the >Project members to believe that the EC members adhere to >higher standards >than anyone else; and since the purpose of the formation of >the EC to begin >with was to take away any political influence the AB might have on the >EC......it is only logical that the EC should put a rule in >its procedures >that no AB member could serve as a worker on the EC because if >an AB member >is a worker on the EC, that worker is not living up to the >higher standards >of the EC being free of possible political influence from the AB. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003