On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Sindhu S <sind...@live.in> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Stormy Peters <stormy.pet...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > The board is not bending the rules. The board sets the rules. They can >> decide whether to decide on each visa reimbursement individually or to set >> a policy or to ask the travel committee to set a policy. They can also as a >> group decide on any exceptions. >> >> It's perfectly reasonable for them to decide on one visa reimbursement >> individually before there is a policy if for some reason they are not ready >> to decide on the policy. Moving forward, regardless of the policy, there >> might be good reasons to handle cases as exceptions. >> > > There already was a rule in place that visa fees will not be reimbursed. > Board *still* hasn't unambiguously said that my case was unexceptional > (when I had applied to visa reimbursement in 2013) as compared to Deigo's > in 2014. I only wanted the board to arrive at a conclusive decision about > visa reimbursements before it dispersed out reimbursements. It must have > brought the new policies in action and then acted according to them > (whether they chose to reimburse visas prior to the policy or not). > > If board can treat cases as "exceptions", then it has and might favor > members of the community who are senior, experienced. What good is a rule > then? What good is a rule if there is meritocracy in deciding how a rule is > enforced? >
The board can decide everything on a case by case basis. They set the rules. Either you think the board is fair or not, but rules that they create will not make them more fair. It sounds like what you really want is an appeals process for your visa reimbursement. Or that you need the board to say they will not reconsider your case. You need some closure. Stormy
_______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
