[19400] in APO-L
Re: A request to all
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nova SS)
Mon Oct 19 21:53:36 1998
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:48:00 -0500
Reply-To: Nova SS <acambre@post.cis.smu.edu>
From: Nova SS <acambre@post.cis.smu.edu>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
I don't like this usage of "locked."
The problem with electing voting delegates is that they have no clear
"platform." We don't know how they stand on every last issue that will come
before the convention. We know them as brothers, not as lawmakers.
I think it very resonable to expect the voting delegate to ask the chapter
for insight on the major issues and vote according to the chapter's will.
The delegate is the chatper's voice, isn't he?
The deadline has passed for submitting some of the most important documents.
There will be no suprises with those. We know what will come up.
For the small issues, there's definitely a trust that the elected delegate
will vote well. He is expected to give serious consideration to what he
knows are the chapter's views.
Granted, it's ridiculous to send a delegate to the convention with 500
directives on how he should vote on every last issue. But I see no reason
why 20 directives is a problem.
