[statecom] Important question Re: credentialing new StateCom reps

[Larry Ely]

AdCom and StateCom,

 From intuitively obvious principles and knowledge concerning human nature, 
from the experience and observation of human interactions in matters 
political, and from observations that experienced users of email have made, 
whatever the process that has been used in the GRP in the past concerning 
credentialing, assuming that our bylaws are not contravened it strikes me 
as a  supremely unwise course to allow the introduction of new StateCom 
members into a virtual (online) meeting for deliberation and decision 
making.  First of all, we do not have the time and where with all to 
ascertain that a potential new StateCom member is in fact a registered J or 
G, nor do we have the means to evaluate why such a new potential StateCom 
member has come to this particular virtual StateCom meeting.  Allowing any 
new member into a virtual StateCom meeting smacks of mischief to me, and I 
think it should to any of you.  In addition to these reasons, a new member 
of this virtual StateCom would come with no requisite background 
information that would enable him or her to make an informed decision 
concerning the issues before the virtual meeting.

Let the Republicans and Democrats stuff the ballot boxes.  I always thought 
that Greens were above this lower level manifestation of human 
consciousness.  That has always been rule zero to this member.

Larry Ely


At 01:17 PM 6/19/08, Merelice wrote:

>Greetings,
>
>Consider this a process question:
>
>I have received a couple of questions regarding the election of new
>StateCom members BEFORE the virtual StateCom meeting now in session
>takes care of the business of the meeting.
>
>AdCom discussed this at its Monday night teleconference. We were told
>that at in-person meetings, part of the credentialing process was
>electing and credentialing _new_ StateCom members and, therefore, it
>would be part of the process of a virtual meeting.
>
>However, in the past, virtual meetings did not include a credentialing
>process because it was assumed that ALL StateCom members receiving the
>notice of the meeting were "credentialed" to participate in the
>meeting. Waiting for quorum was not an issue since the meeting takes
>place over a period of time. We simply needed to hear from at least
>two-thirds of StateCom to complete the business of the virtual
>meeting.
>
>There has not been an effort to add StateCom reps AFTER the notice of
>a virtual meeting went out. I can understand (and share) concerns
>about being asked to vote for new statecom reps without the benefit of
>in-person discourse and, as important, without the potential new reps
>having participated in the business to be addressed at a virtual
>meeting that doesn't allow for the same kind of deliberation as an
>in-person meeting.
>
>I suggest that by virtue of sending out the StateCom meeting notice
>and having already begun the session, the credentialing has already
>taken place. Therefore, we should proceed with the business for which
>the meeting was called.
>
>Merelice (on behalf of other puzzled members)
>
>
>On 6/19/08, Merelice <merelice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >  There have been a couple of references to credentialing new members of
> >  the State Committee. Please notify at least AdCom and preferably
> >  StateCom -- before the vote takes place -- who the new candidates for
> >  StateCom rep are and what counties they are from.
> >
> >  Thanks much,
> >
> > Merelice
> >
>_______________________________________________
>StateCom mailing list
>StateCom at green-rainbow.org
>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom