Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove constant from General Meeting Quorum did not pass #17

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jenseni-git
Copy link

Under the recorded 2024 SGM minutes, it is noted that proposal Remove constant from General Meeting Quorum was passed by majority, 40 yeas to 0 nays, 0 objections.

Of memory, I do not recall this motion passing. I have spoken to a number of different people who were in attendance at the SGM who mentioned they do not recall this motion passing either. If it was a minor correction, I may let it slide, however, due the nature of quorum being an important part of our A/SGMs, I intend to contest the recorded result of the aforementioned motion at the upcoming meeting.

@katrinafyi
Copy link
Member

Is it possible that the motion which passed referred to the motion to table the proposal? This could be made clearer. (Does this also affect the electoral process proposal? Otherwise, I'll look forward to the EGM.)

@jenseni-git
Copy link
Author

Possibly. However, previously such things have been noted as "Motion tabled" (most recent example I can find is 2022-10-06-agm-minutes Pizza Clause - page 6)

I do not suggest holding an E(S)GM unless absolutely necessary and think this can be resolved at the beginning of the AGM. If anyone wants to convene one they can do so under section 17 of our constitution.

@jenseni-git
Copy link
Author

Oh, as for the Electoral process comment. Possibly. At minimum it puts into doubt of the validity of the minutes (which I don't intend). At maximum it means we'll have to revote I guess.

@katrinafyi
Copy link
Member

katrinafyi commented Aug 14, 2024

I'd like to believe the minutes are substantially correct and only require explicitly stating the motions.

Re tabling and previous minutes, I believe a motion can be tabled, but the decision to table a motion is itself a procedural motion and would've demanded a vote or consensus. I suppose this hasn't been precisely minuted in the past, so it's up to you / the people whether to do it now. Edit: I suppose it doesn't matter

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants