[committee] New Door Policy

[Sam Moore]

So, despite your email asking for feedback really sounding like you 
don't want any feedback*, I think someone needs to raise this.

Policy #42: "For such a vote to be successful, all committee members 
present must be either in favour of the motion or abstaining from the vote."

The newest copy of the constitution that I am aware of:
https://www.ucc.asn.au/files/constitutionchanges2015.pdf

Under #6.2: "Except where stated otherwise in the Constitution, a motion 
shall be passed if a majority of those present and eligible to vote cast 
their vote in favour of the motion."

So. Why is the new door policy in contradiction of the constitution?


Also, this particular rule completely fails to solve the problem we had 
with the previous door policy (which said "two-thirds") in three ways:

1. It is still contradicting the constitution
2. It is an even stupider rule
3. It effectively gives an individual committee member veto power.

I am confused about this and hope to be enlightened about the reasons 
for its inclusion upon reading the next minutes. In other feedback, the 
remaining 48 options are not stupid.

That's my feedback. My alternative suggestion is to remove that number 
and keep the others. I recommend you do a vote (in which all committee 
members present must be either in favour of the motion or abstaining 
from the vote).

Yours in closed loop,
[SZM]


* Bonus fact: Feedback is often intentionally added to control many 
different types of system, to reduce the effect of disturbances and 
improve stability. Negative feedback is particularly common in analog 
electronics.



On 15/02/15 12:17, James French wrote:
> To keep it in-line with a practice that we've run with for (at least)
> the past decade, I would suggest that in the notes it should include a
> note along the lines of:
>
> The wheel group can open the room for system maintenance purposes
> only. In carrying out these tasks they are not granted any other of
> the normal door group privileges - including providing access to
> non-wheel members if no members of door are present.
>
> Regards,
> F.
>
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:54 PM,  <committee at ucc.asn.au> wrote:
>> My Continually Sufficient Door Members,
>>
>> Your beloved committee is in the process of drafting a new Door Group
>> policy, because frankly, the old one was just a mess. Some people are of the
>> belief that consulting the members of the Door Group may yield valuable
>> feedback on our toilings, and therefore allow us to write an even better new
>> policy. On a completely unrelated and extremely well documented note, some
>> people are often very wrong. This is your free fun fact of the day.
>>
>> Prove these fools right by submitting any "valuable" feedback you may have
>> to committee at ucc.asn.au. I can personally guarantee it will definitely not
>> then be automatically printed out and fed into a shredder just to make a
>> point... probably.
>>
>> This policy has been written in the mind of being readily adaptable.
>> Specific instructions and extra information for Door Group members will be
>> compiled into a Door Group Handbook that will serve as an appendix to this
>> policy.
>>
>> We eagerly await your feedback. Bonus free fun fact: Feedback is a type of
>> noise common in many systems, and is normally filtered out to improve the
>> quality of the system.
>>
>> Your Glorious Overseer,
>> Andrew Gozzard
>> Master of the Door Group
>> Vice President of The Club
>> _______________________________________________
>> List Archives: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/pipermail/committee
> _______________________________________________
> List Archives: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/pipermail/committee
>