tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post4419275848192071703..comments2023-10-14T21:43:00.223+08:00Comments on Illusio: An issue of statements Iakikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-23413885767970128152009-05-07T11:31:00.000+08:002009-05-07T11:31:00.000+08:00There are always pros and cons, and I guess we nee...There are always pros and cons, and I guess we need to choose the options that hurt the least. Personally, I am not quite prepared to support item (1) even though it was mooted in the media's reports on Aware.<br /><br />Let's review the options:<br /><br />(1)<br /><br />Rationale<br />a. no unknown faces<br />b. those who want an exco position, which has the power to decide the direction of the organisation, had better prove their interest by working in the organisation itself first.<br /><br />Cons<br />a. Show face, clock time, just to qualify for exco?<br /><br />(2)<br /><br />Rationale<br />a. Everyone knows before the AGM who has been nominated for exco. This allows everyone to do their own research and come up with an informed decision.<br /><br />b. I did not recommend any veto over nominations. However if Aware does implement such a veto system, your worry about 'unsuitable candidates' and who gets to set the standard would be correct.<br /><br />(3)<br /><br />Rationale<br /><br />a. The takeover succeeded because voting was restricted to those who turned up for the AGM itself.<br /><br />Cons<br /><br />a. You are right in that it doesn't solve the problem of proxies.<br /><br />Frankly, the most effective constitution change is for Aware to allow vetting, rejection and cancellation of membership subscriptions. And frankly, that's way too restrictive, exclusive, and turns Aware into a closed organisation.akikonomuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-61028218381690276082009-05-07T09:29:00.000+08:002009-05-07T09:29:00.000+08:00Pardon my skepticism:
1. Tallying who has volunte...Pardon my skepticism:<br /><br />1. Tallying who has volunteered reminds me of the 40 hours that some parents clock up to get priority admission for their 1st-borns in popular schools: it opens up another undesireable can of worms.<br /><br />2. This is probably a good suggestion because it encourages transparency. But if you do find "unsuitable" nominees, then what ? Also, who gets to say what qualities/attributes/affiliations are "unsuitable" ?<br /><br />3. Allowing absentee voting simply rachets up the stakes without addressing the problem. Just as one side can go around amassing proxies, so can the other. There are 2 million Singaporeans eligible to be AWARE voting members, does that mean the team that can garner more than 1 million votes wins ?suhawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00399220791514447549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-23947069594211489092009-05-07T00:35:00.000+08:002009-05-07T00:35:00.000+08:00What changes can AWARE make to their Constitution ...<I>What changes can AWARE make to their Constitution to prevent another G9-like takeover ?</I>These suggestions still keep Aware moderately open and inclusive:<br /><br />1. Limiting election of executive committee to active members who have volunteered their time and efforts on Aware's projects or sub-committees for the past calendar year.<br /><br />2. Require nominations for executive committee to be submitted before the AGM so there are no surprises, and all members can scrutinise the nominees in advance.<br /><br />3. Allow absentee voting, so it makes no difference how many people turn up at the AGM.akikonomuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-66658323848000459392009-05-06T22:23:00.000+08:002009-05-06T22:23:00.000+08:00What changes can AWARE make to their Constitution ...What changes can AWARE make to their Constitution to prevent another G9-like takeover ?<br /><br />Please bear in mind that AWARE was founded on and thrives in an open and inclusive environment. Won't restrictive new contitutional provisions undermine everything that AWARE stands for ?suhawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00399220791514447549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-26977818039937396452009-05-05T23:42:00.000+08:002009-05-05T23:42:00.000+08:00i would like to ask about your rationale behind yo...i would like to ask about your rationale behind your naming this operation leper. are you casting aspersions on sufferers of this very sad and debilitating disease. i have nothing against the old guard, new guards etc. but we have to be mindful about using the words "leper", "leprosy". they are words that depict a real disease, involving real people who continue to suffer enormous stigma.tannoreply@blogger.com