[EURO-Discuss] R: Draft Board Report (2012-13) for Lisbon GA

[Roberto Gaetano]

Just on 1 point, my comment below:

> >In response to Oksana's suggestion that ALS *representatives* should be
> >able to be an ALS *representative* in another region, this is forbidden
> >in the ALAC bylaws for a reason to make sure there might not be a
> >possibility of manipulation/capture. It is 99.9% sure that this cannot
> >change because any change to this rule would need approval from the ALAC
> >and approval from the Board and I don't see this happening ever.
> >
> >Of course, there is no rule against being a simple member of several
> >ALSes. I am a member of 3 ALSes in 3 different regions; some are members
> >of more than 3, in different or in the same region, it doesn't matter.
> 
> (WL) I explained this point in length and details already by making clear
that
> we can be *simple members* of different ALSes inside and outside a region
> BUT we can NOT be *representatives* of more than one ALS (inside or
> outside a region), as you confirmed Olivier. And I repeatedly noted that
we
> (at RALO level) cannot change this rule. IF anybody is still unhappy with
this
> binding ALAC rule, the person can try to convince ALAC about a respective
> change of their Bylaws! This was my very last comment on this point.

I agree with Wolf and Olivier that it will be very difficult to change the
bylaws on this point.
But besides the difficulty and complexity, what would be the *real* need for
such change?
Honestly, I believe that our aim should be to include more and more people,
and electing the same representative as a leader for multiple ALSes, whether
in the same or different region, is going in the opposite direction. We
should favour more individuals to get leadership responsibilities in ALAC,
not have the same set of people speaking in name of more ALSes.
So, I am personally against this proposal, not for the complexity of the
change, but because it will move us in the wrong direction.
Cheers,
R.