[513] in UA Senate
Re: Senate Bylaws Maintenance Bill
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Hawkins)
Sun Apr 4 19:14:12 2010
Reply-To: hwkns@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <j2r8eb495951004041605u844ee245l8c9f31a50a5ee11@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 19:14:08 -0400
From: Daniel Hawkins <hwkns@MIT.EDU>
To: Tim Stumbaugh <stum@mit.edu>
Cc: Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu>, UA Senate <ua-senate@mit.edu>
--0016e68ee46a964cb20483715e00
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
If people really don't like it the first time, they can move to postpone
indefinitely. That's not exactly the same, but I think it serves the same
purpose.
-hwkns
On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Tim Stumbaugh <stum@mit.edu> wrote:
> I was thinking that if people really don't like it the first time, we
> save a week. I'm fine with just having the dereference to the table
> and just say it must appear on the agenda at two separate meetings.
>
> On 4/4/10, Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu> wrote:
> > Can you say anything about why you want a two-thirds majority at each
> > meeting? That seems like it will add unnecessary overhead to the
> > process. I think that the idea behind requiring it sit on the table for
> > a week is to avoid surprising people who might care, and I don't think
> > requiring an affirmative vote at each meeting helps that any.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alex
> >
>
>
> --
> -Tim
> "There is no emotion, there is peace."
>
--0016e68ee46a964cb20483715e00
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If people really don't like it the first time, they can move to postpon=
e indefinitely.=A0 That's not exactly the same, but I think it serves t=
he same purpose.<br><br>-hwkns<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Ap=
r 4, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Tim Stumbaugh <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto=
:stum@mit.edu">stum@mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; borde=
r-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">I was thinking th=
at if people really don't like it the first time, we<br>
save a week. I'm fine with just having the dereference to the table<br>
and just say it must appear on the agenda at two separate meetings.<br>
<div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><br>
On 4/4/10, Alex Dehnert <<a href=3D"mailto:adehnert@mit.edu">adehnert@mi=
t.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
> Can you say anything about why you want a two-thirds majority at each<=
br>
> meeting? That seems like it will add unnecessary overhead to the<br>
> process. I think that the idea behind requiring it sit on the table fo=
r<br>
> a week is to avoid surprising people who might care, and I don't t=
hink<br>
> requiring an affirmative vote at each meeting helps that any.<br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
> Alex<br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><font color=3D"#888888">--<br>
-Tim<br>
"There is no emotion, there is peace."<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br><div style=3D"visibility: hidden; display: in=
line;" id=3D"avg_ls_inline_popup"></div><style type=3D"text/css">#avg_ls_in=
line_popup { position:absolute; z-index:9999; padding: 0px 0px; margin-=
left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; width: 240px; overflow: hidden; word-wrap: =
break-word; color: black; font-size: 10px; text-align: left; line-heigh=
t: 13px;}</style>
--0016e68ee46a964cb20483715e00--
