Ross, Let me amplify my point. I am simply saying that it should be up to each constituency alone to decide who may or may not represent it. I do not believe it is appropriate for anyone outside the ISPs to tell us whom we can choose to represent us in the Council; that would be tantamount to exerting control over our constituency. Greg --- Ross Rader <ross@tucows.com> wrote:
Greg Ruth wrote:
Philip et al, Whether we are "leaping" or not, I agree we should have a discussion. And I believe it can start now, on this list. My opinion is that, except in the case of NomCom appointees (who represent no constituency), the matter of term limits should be left for each constituency to decide for itself.
My personal view is that the Council and the Board should decide how this group is constituted in order that the basic foundations for our
processes and outcomes are stable and predictable. I don't think that
this is a constituency decision any more than it is a constituency decision regarding how many reps from each constituency sit on the Council, or the term of those seats, etc.
From my perspective, the first question that we should be looking at is whether or no term limits are desirable. The second question is whose
responsibility it is to implement them (or not). (i.e. if limits are desirable, then is this a board, council or constituency decision?).
-ross
____________________________________________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com