Unfortunately, none of propositions for handling such situation got incorporated into bylaws, and only proposition that Council have, is stretching the rules.
I think, that it's clearly unfair to do so, in case of *negative* Randall's example - when, just a while ago, we disagreed to bend rules for *positive* case of Mentalist Traceur willing to candidate for Board (he was late few hours with his candidacy). If we (as per we = Community) declined his right to candidate, due to will for following rules strictly, we should so now. And that, sadly, via actual version of bylaws, mean another period of submitting candidates, and election. Thanks Texrat, for withdrawing your candidacy just few hours, after 86 people voted for you, and voting got closed. It helped estabilishing foundation a *much*, really... /Estel On sob 20 paź 2012 19:39:19 CEST, misterc <[email protected]> wrote: > think there was a fairly extended debate during "foundation by-laws" > about how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now, > but i think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html > Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing > list [email protected] > https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
_______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing list [email protected] https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
