Originally Posted by
essxjay
Given the magnitude of the ramification (of excising non-US programs from FT) in your hypothetical, of course.
As for the current motion being "quite proper?" No, it's not. (IMHO.) Just because TB Guidelines permit that such a motion can be made, doesn't mean it should have been. Just my 2FFMW ... my judgment call about your judgment call. :shrug:
I'll be honest with ya: I SERIOUSLY considered making a motion that 'The TB approves of Randy's implementation of the policy of not counting OMNI posts...'
Such a motion, had it been seconded, would have put the super-majority burden firmly on the side of advising Randy that the TB APPROVED of his implementation of this policy. Naturally I would have then voted AGAINST this motion in the hope if it failing. @:-)
But I decided the more honorable thing to do was to give Randy's decision the benefit of the doubt by putting the super-majority burden on the side of asking Randy to reconsider his decision, such that even if a super-
minority of the members of the TB agree with Randy's decision then the TB agrees with Randy's decision.
So....I dunno. I feel like the TB ought to be on the record about this decision whether we're consulted about it or not and that given the options this motion gives Randy's decision maximum respect and benefit of the doubt.