Roberto Gaetano ha scritto:
To take time in order to do a more in-depth analysis, seems to me to be a wise approach. My only suggestion is to make sure that this solution is agreed beforehand with the applicant.
I disagree: deferring the vote on the accreditation of a European ALS from just before the EURALO GA to just after the EURALO GA would deprive them of the possibility to vote at that GA. You need to have a very valid, unchallengeable rationale to do that. It would really not look good if France@Large went to the Ombudsman and said that the current EURALO people are trying to find excuses to reject or defer their application until the GA is done: even if that is false, it would be hard to disprove, especially since I've yet to listen to a convincing reason against approving this application - until now, I've only heard a lot of FUD, but no fact. On the other hand, if staff contacted the other people listed in the application and ascertained that they're not really active or aware about what this is about, then I might be in favour of rejecting the application. But you need to have convincing evidence about this, as I am pretty sure that Monsieur Morfin will go straight towards the Ombudsman office if the application is rejected. Ciao, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------