On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 05:29:34PM +0000, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
The trouble with your argument that we can just trust the Board to remain within the Mission when invited by the GAC to stray beyond it, without a mechanism to review their decisions, is that the same argument applies equally to the case of the Board acting inconsistently with the Bylaws in any other way, as it does to the specific case of the Board acting inconsistently with the Mission limitation.
But I'm not making that argument (hence the tripartite response). But re-reading my message, I certainly didn't make my point clear. All I was trying to say was that, given the empowered community and the new accountability and so on, the case where the board will decide to wander out of its areas of responsibilty seems lower. And then, even if it does, we have the other mechanisms in place. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com