Sunday, August 13, 2006
A Proposal without a number
In reading over old National Committee emails I came across what I think is a great idea. It comes from Morgen D'Arc of Maine. I've made some tiny changes, but the basic idea is hers. I hope someone who can do so will persuade their state, caucus or committee to give this proposal a number and get it into the GNC voting queue.
Every state, when submitting a representative to serve on a committee, should submit a "signed" statement from the applicant that they have:
1. - Read the committee's Policies and Procedures, and agree to abide by them.
B. - Read the Green Party's Netiquette Guidelines (do we have any?), and agree to abide by them.
3rd. - Agree to be removed from a committee if the committee, by a super-majority vote, determines that the committee member is not abiding by the rules.
IV. - No committee will be required to accept any applicant who has been removed from another committee for not abiding by the rules.
OK, so it's not much like Morgen's suggestion but I think the idea is at least worth discussion and refinement. Morgen's basic proposal is hiding behind the "Read more!" link...
I would require her to sign a statement agreeing that she would leave the committee immediately and be taken off the (committee) list if she presented problems or caused disruption and that if she didn't leave on her own, then she would be removed or asked that she resign from the committee. She would also have to agree that she would not invoke any state party authority over the removal or resignation.
I think any Green who comes to a committee with a disruptive and disrespectful reputation should sign such a statement. The state party is not always aware of what their delegates or committee approved people are doing. Some are not even very well known to their state parties. Just because a state party highly recommends someone
is not a reason why national delegates and committee members should not get a say in the state approved person's committee status if that state approved person behaves badly to Greens working on national committees and/or if they cause disruption to the committee.
I think this approach could help solve this problem overall, because it gives more consciousness to both sides, and a chance to learn from the experience. If someone truly wants to be on a committee to be involved in the productive work of a group of people, then they will want to learn how to participate productively together.
IMO Greens really don't want to get rid of anyone. This sentiment could be at the root of why we have such a huge problem with removal. I believe my suggestion above is a middle ground approach that helps in part to address this sentiment while still addressing the problem. Because the potential members have read and signed a statement, I think some will be more conscious of what they are doing which can incline to learning and with some people possibly resolving the difficulty.
Morgen D'Arc
Maine
Every state, when submitting a representative to serve on a committee, should submit a "signed" statement from the applicant that they have:
1. - Read the committee's Policies and Procedures, and agree to abide by them.
B. - Read the Green Party's Netiquette Guidelines (do we have any?), and agree to abide by them.
3rd. - Agree to be removed from a committee if the committee, by a super-majority vote, determines that the committee member is not abiding by the rules.
IV. - No committee will be required to accept any applicant who has been removed from another committee for not abiding by the rules.
OK, so it's not much like Morgen's suggestion but I think the idea is at least worth discussion and refinement. Morgen's basic proposal is hiding behind the "Read more!" link...
I would require her to sign a statement agreeing that she would leave the committee immediately and be taken off the (committee) list if she presented problems or caused disruption and that if she didn't leave on her own, then she would be removed or asked that she resign from the committee. She would also have to agree that she would not invoke any state party authority over the removal or resignation.
I think any Green who comes to a committee with a disruptive and disrespectful reputation should sign such a statement. The state party is not always aware of what their delegates or committee approved people are doing. Some are not even very well known to their state parties. Just because a state party highly recommends someone
is not a reason why national delegates and committee members should not get a say in the state approved person's committee status if that state approved person behaves badly to Greens working on national committees and/or if they cause disruption to the committee.
I think this approach could help solve this problem overall, because it gives more consciousness to both sides, and a chance to learn from the experience. If someone truly wants to be on a committee to be involved in the productive work of a group of people, then they will want to learn how to participate productively together.
IMO Greens really don't want to get rid of anyone. This sentiment could be at the root of why we have such a huge problem with removal. I believe my suggestion above is a middle ground approach that helps in part to address this sentiment while still addressing the problem. Because the potential members have read and signed a statement, I think some will be more conscious of what they are doing which can incline to learning and with some people possibly resolving the difficulty.
Morgen D'Arc
Maine
// posted by Gregg Jocoy @ 2:53 PM 
