We will be having a special meeting later this month, in order to deal with McKim/Rekhson and Zeromskis/Mallon. Should the NFP Act Committee Report be rejected, Mallon/Denommee will be voted on at that time as well.
We will be having a special meeting later this month, in order to deal with McKim/Rekhson and Zeromskis/Mallon. Should the NFP Act Committee Report be rejected, Mallon/Denommee will be voted on at that time as well.
Actually the NFP motion was an amendment, not a new motion - but I didn't have the text of what the actual motion was so I couldn't phrase it properly.
Christopher Mallon
FIDE Arbiter
The really democratic way would have been to put this compliance to NFP under discussion first for at least one quarter...
Valer Eugen Demian
FIDE CM & Instructor, ICCF IM
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ches...593013634?mt=8
I am saying that requiring the committee to come back with a new report is not an amendment. If you aren't happy with the report, vote against it. A successful vote to table it is tantamount to those in opposition voting to disband the committee, as I am fairly certain this group will not be redrafting its proposals. As such, this vote should continue as is. If it's successful, great - Les can start redrafting the Constitution. If it's not, great - a new committee may form and present its own report.