Page 1 of 1
Let's have an election
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:20 am
by zarathustra
To publish to our general forum, meccg.net, national councils' forums, and the email list:
The CoE holds annual elections in March. We want to invite all members of the community to consider candidacy for the CoE. As a member of the 9-person council, you will have the responsibility to:
(1) Represent the interests of players like you (i.e., from your country, your region, your game-play style, etc.),
(2) Work on the draft of a possible new constitution for the CoE,
(3) Support active and nascent national councils,
(4) Bring your fresh and innovative ideas to the game, and
(5) Maintain and further develop the COE projects and tasks like JCP, NetRep, Worlds and EC, MECCG Promotion, COE newsletter, players & traders directory, UEP, virtual cards, etc.
Contact the registrar, Chad Martin, if you are interested in running. Time commitments are about 1-3 hours per week.
Second this motion?
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:39 pm
by jhunholz
I second it!
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:57 pm
by thorondor
agreed!
maybe add something like:
maintaining and further developing of all the COE projects and tasks like JCP, NetRep, Worlds and EC, MECCG Promotion, COE newsletter, players&traders directory, UEP, virtual cards (did i orget something?)
Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:22 pm
by zarathustra
Amendment deemed friendly
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 6:24 am
by zarathustra
Can I ask what's wrong with the motion? Someone voted against it....
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:27 pm
by charles jenkins
I cast the lone dissent. I spoke with Mark about this privately recently.
The reasons I disagreed were:
1. I do not support UEP's. You already know this. I can't accept various "unofficial" changes to the game that serve (IMO) to pander to pet likes and dislikes that additionally are "accepted" based upon a very small vote total. I know that many other players share my
opinion. There also seems to be momentum attached to such projects that could make UEPs a self-fulfilling prophecy. Over-reaction on my part? Maybe, but that's how I feel. Therefore, I do not support UEP's (as currently developed and accepted) as part of the CoE agenda.
2. The virtual card project seemed, to me, to be more of a pet project
brainstormed by those involved rather than a CoE project, per se. That doesn't mean that the effort lacks value, etc.
Overall, I think that announcement item (5) is more of an "opportunity" to be involved in the quoted activities, rather than given involvement.
Respectfully yours.