Agenda for April Meeting
- This topic has 312 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
lindanesocialist wrote:steve colborn wrote:No, and I'll say this one, last, time, there are "NO" Standing Orders" for "Online" meetings. We are the first Branch to attempt this format. The "Standing Orders" you may, or may not have posted, were for live, face to face, meetings.That is my final word!!!
Could I ask if this is still the final word of the Chair?
vin
The only accusations are comming from you SP. I suggest you stop themLook up the what PM means. There has been no public slur made upon youSuspension of standing orders requires a democratic vote just as 'next business' does. The motion by Tim has not been seconded so is not yet up for discussion. That is if we had a chair However, the motion for the 2 Form Fs have been seconded and the chair ignored standing orders by not allowing the motion to be put to be discussed and put to a vote.I repeat my appeal for members to read the SO Noone is perfect but we need some form of structure to a meeting and SO are a good start
The only accusations are comming from you SP. I suggest you stop them This is a lie. Setting aside standing orders was moved, seconded and voted upon. The motion carried. The reason this happened was to discuss accusations of bullying, towards SP, as is well documented on the previous pages of this thread. So I, suggest, it is "you", who needs to stop, in this instance, rewriting "history".As for this; the motion for the 2 Form Fs have been seconded and the chair ignored standing orders by not allowing the motion to be put to be discussed and put to a vote.This is incorrect. You were told that Forms F would be considered under any other business. It had not, at the time the two Form's F were raised, been decided by the meeting to overturn the Setting aside of Standing Orders, so de facto, the meeting was still considering the issues that Standing Orders had been set aside for, vis a vis, accusations of bullying and the threats that went with them.In summation, get your facts right.
As chairperson you have allowed this business meeting to be dominated by a members’ personal grievances for almost four days. and nothing has been achieved. What is exchanged between members in PMs – Personal Messages – is not the business of the branch.There has been no public slurAs Chair you have allowed a friend of yours to attack two other members online and in public, instead carrying out your function as an impersonal objective chairpersonWhen asked about Standing Orders, as Chair you declared their non existence as your ‘final say’ on the matter. Well the bad news is that is not your decision to make.Do you still deny the Party has SO for online meetings? I suggest you read them.You have embarrassed and divided the branch with you actions in the chair and as you and I know Stephen it will not be the first time you have done this .I suggest you bring the meeting to order and declare that personal greviances are not the business of the branch.If a member wishes to bring a charge against other members it should be put in writing to the branch, or do you deny the existence of a rule book too? Vin and Linda
And by the way Vin, I have carried out the role of Chair in an impersonal way.It is you, moreover, through obfuscation, who has brought the meeting divided and embarassed the Branch and it was 2 members, I think you know who they are, who accused SP of bullying, and then there were the threats of course!!!
By the way, the PM's refered to were shared with other members of the Branch, not just SP. I've got an inbox full of them, so much for "Private Messages!!!
steve colborn wrote:Personal Grievances Vin? You mean threats towards SP surelyIt is not the business of the meeting, just as the threats you made to members and some you carried out is not the business of this meetingand as you know SP has nothing to fear from me. That is a diversion from your chairing of this meeting which has been embarrasing.Do you accept that there are SO for online meetings? Or have you had your final word on the matter?
More obfuscation Vin?Were you aware, that many posts ago, I actually stood down as chair? All your silly obfuscatory, smoke and mirrors have been for nought. You could have just selected a new Chair1 Oh happy days.
By the way, it was in order, that upon a motion, moved, seconded and voted upon, which motion was carried, that Standing Orders were set aside and a member raised issues of "urgency" and that these were discussed.No personal leanings or friendship came into it.
I will not post your emails or inform the branch about your threats because that would make me untrustworthy and treacherous and besides out of order and not the business of the branch unless of course the threats and violence were brought to the branch meeting then it would have to be dealt with Vin
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.