[UK-TUG] Obtaining a clear outcome from the SGM

[Jonathan Fine]

Hi David

Thank you for your prompt reply. I'm glad we're having this discussion now
rather than during the SGM.

I agree with you that the topic of the SGM is dissolution. Your conclusion
is that "motions that explicitly propose dissolution should have priority".
This I don't accept. I admire the resourcefulness of your reasoning.

Joseph in a personal communication has told me that my motions are valid
for the SGM. You have also implicitly accepted that statement. One of my
motions (JF1) proposes a manner in which the assets are distributed. That
is clearly in scope.

Your conclusion implies that only AFTER continuation or dissolution has
been decided can my motion JF1 be considered by the SGM. But the
Constitution explicitly states only by passing a motion BEFORE resolving to
dissolve can a general meeting instruct the committee.

Your conclusion implies that it is impossible for the SGM to decide to
dissolve with JF1 providing the manner for the distribution of funds. This
is absurd and unfair.  I suggest there is an error in your reasoning.

I say that the principle governing the order of discussion and voting is
common-sense and fairness. I have more to say, but I think that is enough
for now.

with kind regards

Jonathan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://tug.org/pipermail/uktug-announce/attachments/20211015/ed8350c5/attachment.html>