From: annie@ivgate.omahug.org
Date: Tue Nov 08 2005 - 08:27:43 CST
Thanks to everybody who has provided input so far, both here in the
ORG list and off line.
It is indeed unfortunate that we overlooked this earlier. It's good,
however, that we found out about it before the majority of our attendees
started booking rooms.
I do agree with Michelle that there are two issues here, the first and
most pressing one being "do we reschedule?"
I see the date (re)selection process as a separate issue, and only
relevant if we should decide to review and reconsider the DLV 2006
timeframe.
Yes, we have an issue. is it enough of an issue to warrant rescheduling?
Even though we are the group who will make this decision, and decide
the new timeframe if it's necessary to do so, I do think we need to
consult the Teeming Millions before selecting a new timeframe.
I think we should send out a general mailing, without delay, stating
things just the way they are, inviting discussion and encouraging
input, prior to selecting a new timeframe.
I won't do this, however, without a consensus here.
This doesn't have to delay our vote to reconsider the timeframe, but we
do need to inform our people and invite input.
We do have a hill to climb so to speak. In November 2003 we passed a
standing rule that requires us to have a 2/3 majority of the group here
to change any scheduled date by more than 3 days. Any motion to
reschedule would most certainly fall under this.
Now -- since I am the one who catches the crap when somebody isn't happy
with DLV, I am going to insist on doing things very carefully and
methodically, and yes, following the procedures that we've agreed upon.
I'm sure that no matter what happens, there will be a few people who
aren't going to be happy with the result. I don't want anybody calling
"foul" due to a technicality.
It's well established by precedent that the ORG group, those of us who
have stepped forward to make DLV happen, is the "electorate" so to speak
of DLV. We also agreed that any motion to change already-scheduled DLV
dates by more than 3 days requires a 2/3 majority of the group here
to carry. We also agreed that we will not schedule anything on Mothers
Day or the 2 days immediately prior to Mothers day, meaning that May
9, 10, and 11 are off limits should we decide to review and reconsider
the dates for DLV 2006.
Therefore I am presenting the following motion to the group here for
consideration:
I move that we review and reconsider the dates for DLV 2006, seeking
input from the past and potential attendees, and accept nominations for
alternative timeframes from the ORG group, and from attendees via the
ORG group.
Do I hear a second?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 06 2006 - 16:16:51 CDT