Discussion about Petitions

[Wayne]

"Any member who serves or has served in the position of 'Exalted Leader' and refuses to vacate the seat despite the will of the majority of the members during that members time of administration, said member will have relinquished all voting rights and the ability to resume any admin or moderator position in any format that gives access to any form of the administrator or moderator panel.

This clause cannot be reversed as any member refusing to vacate the position and subject themselves to an independent election process has demonstrated the unsuitability for the position"

The wording doesn't make sense. How do you get them to leave and relinquish in the first place? The only person who has the power to remove anyone is Freediver, the board owner - he is actually the EL! The wording should be along the lines of:

"Any member who serves or has served in the position of 'Exalted Leader' and refuses to vacate the seat despite the will of the majority of the members during that members time of administration will cause a petition to the board owner to be raised. The petition will seek the removal of the encumbent EL and trigger the appointment of a replacement by members vote. The removed member will have relinquished all voting rights and the ability to resume any admin or moderator position in any format that gives access to any form of the administrator or moderator panel.

Any member removed by this process will not be eligible to be nominated nor stand for any moderator position and may be subject to a members vote to exclude their access to the PA Boards.

[AiA in Atlanta]

"Any member who serves or has served in the position of 'Exalted Leader' and refuses to vacate the seat despite the will of the majority of the members during that members time of administration, said member will have relinquished all voting rights and the ability to resume any admin or moderator position in any format that gives access to any form of the administrator or moderator panel.

This clause cannot be reversed as any member refusing to vacate the position and subject themselves to an independent election process has demonstrated the unsuitability for the position"

The wording doesn't make sense. How do you get them to leave and relinquish in the first place? The only person who has the power to remove anyone is Freediver, the board owner - he is actually the EL! The wording should be along the lines of:

"Any member who serves or has served in the position of 'Exalted Leader' and refuses to vacate the seat despite the will of the majority of the members during that members time of administration will cause a petition to the board owner to be raised. The petition will seek the removal of the encumbent EL and trigger the appointment of a replacement by members vote. The removed member will have relinquished all voting rights and the ability to resume any admin or moderator position in any format that gives access to any form of the administrator or moderator panel.

Any member removed by this process will not be eligible to be nominated nor stand for any moderator position and may be subject to a members vote to exclude their access to the PA Boards.

I had some questions as well. This can be clarified. Only one admin/EL has been removed and that was by FD, so yes, FD is the only one who can actually remove an admin ...

[cods]

did the siting admin refuse to leave the post???>..

I am confused by the whole thread.....I am new you see..

I am not eligible to vote

if fd holds the winning hand... then surely it isnt a number cruncher..

who on earth would not step aside if the majority of members voted them out saying HEY WE DONT WANT YOU!..


I MEAN WHO DOES THAT?

[Redneck]

I too am wondering what this was all about and what brought it on?

[skippy]

I am moving discussion about the admin petition to here.

[skippy]

did the siting admin refuse to leave the post???>..

I am confused by the whole thread.....I am new you see..

I am not eligible to vote

if fd holds the winning hand... then surely it isnt a number cruncher..

who on earth would not step aside if the majority of members voted them out saying HEY WE DONT WANT YOU!..


I MEAN WHO DOES THAT?

I will give you one guess who did that cods?
I have no problem with this petition, I am an ex admin myself and it applies to the likes of me.
Only those afraid of majority rules democracy would be afraid of this.

[IQS.RLOW]

Its pretty simple.

If you hold/held a position and:
Acted contrary to the rules
Deleted valid petitions
Banned members
Issued veiled threats
Had to be crowbarred out of the seat

Then you have earned the right to never hold an authoritative position at PA ever again.

[Redneck]

Its pretty simple.

If you hold/held a position and:
Acted contrary to the rules
Deleted valid petitions
Banned members
Issued veiled threats
Had to be crowbarred out of the seat

Then you have earned the right to never hold an authoritative position at PA ever again.

I assume we are talking about Aussie!

But why did this raise its head now I am wondering?

[Black Orchid]

did the siting admin refuse to leave the post???>..

Yes

I am not eligible to vote

I think you should be but SN or Skippy would need to confirm it.

who on earth would not step aside if the majority of members voted them out saying HEY WE DONT WANT YOU!..


I MEAN WHO DOES THAT?

Take a guess lol

[Wayne]

did the siting admin refuse to leave the post???>..

I am confused by the whole thread.....I am new you see..

I am not eligible to vote

if fd holds the winning hand... then surely it isnt a number cruncher..

who on earth would not step aside if the majority of members voted them out saying HEY WE DONT WANT YOU!..


I MEAN WHO DOES THAT?

I will give you one guess who did that cods?
I have no problem with this petition, I am an ex admin myself and it applies to the likes of me.
Only those afraid of majority rules democracy would be afraid of this.

I have no problem at all with the thrust of the petition either Skip, it was just the wording that I questioned. My understanding is that FD is the only person who can remove the control from an existing EL by simply removing their access to the moderator capability. Therefore the flow should be:

Existing members raise a vote of no confidence in the exisiting EL
A petition to FD is made to remove the existing EL
Concurrent to that, an election for a new EL is made
FD is requested to transfer control of EL function fro the incumbent to the new EL
The "old El" is ruled ineligible to stand for any moderator position or even banned from PA

Regards,

Wayne