koko, i'll ask the question I've asked on previous occasions, and which has never been answered - or been ignored!

how many votes have there been to remove a member in breach of their TB obligations?

The opportunity to vote would show that the system is working. But I can find no evidence of any. I've asked the question and no-one has pointed out any - and I'm sure they would have done if it had occurred.

But it seems that you can miss however many votes you like and the only people who can do anything about it, the TB members, don't really give a damn. All those proud words about eligibility, and giving members the right to decide who represents them are only so much words, because once on TB, you can sit back, refuse to carry out your responsibilities.

I'd have fewer problems with the status quo if we kept voting and the motions to remove failed. At least then, the members would see what was going on. But that doesn't even happen. All they see is that a member has missed x votes and nothing gets done about it. That's not leadership - that's shirking our responsibilities. And then traditionally, that member steps down at the end of their term, so there is no opportunity to hold them responsible by the members. It's a nice cosy, little club, and any attempt to prevent this happening is met with howls of 'BLACK HELICOPTERS!!! BLACK HELICOPTERS!!!!'

And yes, your statement about the next TB is very telling. We are on a bit of a go slow aren't we? Never mind, perhaps the long-cherised hope of getting some 'new blood' on TB will be born out... which is a tad ironic, since I'm much newer blood on TB than some of the people expressing those hopes in oh so many ways