On Apr 17, 2009, at 00:16, Valerie Bubb Fenwick wrote: > > Today's agenda was full of policies to consider for our term, which > will dictate > how the OGB acts wrt to everything we do going forward. > Unfortunately, we didn't > have enough folks to get definitive votes on many items today > (several were split > 50/50), so their back on the agenda for next Thursday. > > I think we need to do those *first* and then we can continue our > discussion on > priorities.
Right, understood as a pragmatic & temporary matter. Concerning strategy, I'm asserting that we have a very clear priority to get the almost-finished constitution iterated & ratified so the new work we do fits it. I'm unhappy that it's been pushed off the agenda, onto a "priorities" discussion and with the implication that the outcome of that discussion itself will get tested by a future "poll" - effectively procedural cancellation of the discussion. This is wasting time as well as wasting the work of the previous Board, and I want to hear clearly from the OGB who it is wants that waste and why. S.
