Originally Posted by
Jenbel
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
[I am very busy with meetings today so this is again a slightly edited re-post of something I previously posted in the private TB forum on the same topic]
If someone is perma-banned it seems to me they'd meet the
- Is no longer an active, registered member of the FT Community
- Demonstrates by his/her actions that he/she is not able to actively participate in the TB duties
grounds well before they met the 3 missed votes dealio.
Frankly I don't have a big problem with TB members missing votes unexpectedly. Stuff happens. That's life. If it seems to be a permanent thing, that's a problem. But if it is clearly temporary, well it's not like we cannot conduct business with 8 TB members when necessary. We're all busy people with plenty of obligations and situations that might unexpectedly take us away from our computer for a length of time. Sure, it changes the math slightly when others fail to vote, but it also make MY vote that much more powerful!
^
I actually don't REALLY support the new censure/removal provisions in the guidelines (that existed in the draft BEFORE the controversial auto removal provision was put in the version that went for a vote) for the same reason, but accept them because I see them as a compromise between my views and the auto-removal system others support. They give the TB flexibility when a TB member disappoints 2/3 of us. Let's look at those again:
i. Any voting TB member may make a motion for the censure or removal of another TB member or officer. Censure or removal of an elected TB member is a grave matter and should only be employed in severe circumstances. It should never be employed based on a disagreement of policy, personality or style.
ii. A motion to censure or remove shall include the valid grounds for censure or removal as allowed by these guidelines.
iii. Should such a motion receive a second the President shall initiate a sticky poll to allow TB members to vote on the matter, which shall take place by secret ballot.
iv. A 2/3 majority shall be required for approval of such a motion.
v. In the event of the passage of a motion to censure or remove, the TB Vice President/Secretary shall post the motion along with the results of the censure or removal vote in the Town Hall forum along with a statement by the TB member should he or she desire to include one and then ask the TB forums moderator to lock that thread 'per TB guidelines.' Should the motion fail there is to be no public notice of the motion whatsoever.
vi. In the event of the passage of a motion to remove, the President shall submit a request for removal and replacement of said member to the FlyerTalk Host for consideration.
vii. Grounds for censure or removal of a TB member:
a. Fails to participate in three consecutive discussions on pending motions without prior notice
b. Misses three consecutive calls to vote without prior notice
c. Is no longer an active, registered member of the FT Community
d. Demonstrates by his/her actions that he/she is not able to actively participate in the TB duties
e. Acts in wilful and gross serious, repeated violation of the FT member Terms of Service (TOS)
f. Acts in wilful and gross serious, repeated violation of these guidelines
g. Abuses the censure and removal process
vii. In all cases the FlyerTalk Host makes the final determination whether to remove a TB member.
That looks like a pretty good compromise: you could go ahead and make a motion to censure or remove a TB member under those guidelines for missing the votes or for e. or f. or whatever and we'd get on with life.
And just because I might or might not support such a motion on a case-by-case basis does NOT automatically mean that automatic removals are called for or that the status quo is broken.
I understand why you are so frustrated because, believe it or not, I do understand your point of view: you think people who don't vote or who get a 30-day don't belong on TB. Period. I get it. I just have a different viewpoint from you with regard to the entire matter of suspensions and missing votes is all.
I prefer to allow each TB member to vote his or her best judgement on a case-by-case basis just as we do for any other matter before the TB and let the chips fall where they may.
Each of us is elected to use our own best judgement. And that includes our judgment regarding whether to remove another TB member or not. If the posters disagree with that judgement they can vote us out at election time.