|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 11:47:36 GMT -5
As my e-ls said, we need to discuss the recent activities because it is a breach of protocal. It's informal, so lets just discuss. I''m trying to figure out when 1 or 2 people's opinion outweighs the majority  No discussion, no e-voting. I don't understand. |
|
|
|
Post by Ms. RedamnDickulous on Jul 23, 2010 11:54:12 GMT -5
I agree...I traveled from 9nerland to attend this e meeting and express my concerns and displeasure for the blatant violation in OO protocol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 12:00:36 GMT -5
The floor is open, free to discuss.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ms. RedamnDickulous on Jul 23, 2010 12:19:38 GMT -5
Ummm, why is this beginning to feel like 1912? Juicy, is the OO membership starting to work on two seperate agendas...? What's really good?
|
|
|
|
Post by Southie on Jul 23, 2010 12:23:37 GMT -5
Lets start with the begining of the situation. I think it would be best if the E-Dean and E-ADP would present their sides of the story first and their decision. Once again, this is an issue of protocol.
|
|
|
|
Post by IvyByDesign on Jul 23, 2010 12:32:37 GMT -5
:walks in and has a seat:
|
|
|
|
Post by Ms. RedamnDickulous on Jul 23, 2010 12:41:21 GMT -5
<----shuts up, joins BB.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sapphire on Jul 23, 2010 13:04:05 GMT -5
*Joins the meeting to see what the fuss is all about*
|
|
|
|
Post by Chal™ on Jul 23, 2010 13:15:28 GMT -5
*enters the meeting room and speaks to everyone*
*gets glared at in response*
*O-o*
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 13:40:38 GMT -5
*p*
I have e-died at Chal!
*p*
Alright, e-sorors. The issue at e-hand is that the chapter gave a 100% e-vote to drop Egg 2. Egg 2 was off e-line for almost a week. Last night, we are notified not through a e-meeting, or PMs, or anything that Egg 2 is back on. The decision of the e-chapter was to drop Egg 2. So we are not understanding how Egg 2 was put back on e-line when there was no e-discussion or e-vote had by the e-chapter at large who e-voted her off.
This is about e-protocol. The majority voted her off, and now she is all of a sudden back on without a discussion or e-vote.
This is not how things are done in Omega Omicron. The e-majority rules.
Can the e-ADP or e-DP please advise what transpired and how it was decided to put Egg 2 back on when the e-members voted no?
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 13:41:04 GMT -5
Ummm, why is this beginning to feel like 1912? Juicy, is the OO membership starting to work on two seperate agendas...? What's really good? No, not on my e-watch. |
|
|
|
Post by Sapphire on Jul 23, 2010 13:55:24 GMT -5
*Stands up nervously to respond*
I see that there is some concern about Owlet2 being allowed to complete her e-process. While I would prefer to handle this issue in e-house, since there is a meeting and open discussion I am happy to participate.
First and foremost, I would like to point out that Owlet2’s fate was not something we took lightly. However, after careful consideration and discussion it was the opinion of the e-Dean and e-ADP of the line that she should be allowed to finish. She had only missed a few days (lawd knows how little happens with these yamps in that time) and had been communicating with us regarding her status during that time.
Regarding protocol, traditionally the chapter e-members have the opportunity to select the candidates that are ultimately selected to participate on the line. Many of the issues that Owlet2 had were apparent from the beginning… yet the majority of you voted her in anyway. She is not the first challenging e-initiate, and probably won’t be the last, which is why the membership intake e-vote should not be taken lightly.
Once candidates have been selected for the line it has always been the responsibility of the e-Dean and e-ADP to determine if they should finish and be inducted as full members.
And of course as e-sisters, we are naturally concerned with everyone’s opinion of the e-line and welcome your opinions and suggestions. In any situation where you feel an individual or an entire line isn’t up to par, it would be expected that the e-Dean and e-ADP take necessary action.
However, we have never held a vote among e-sorors to determine whether one e-pledge should be dropped. And even if protocol did require a chapter e-vote (which it does not), a majority vote would be in order. The vote that was conducted last week did not meet that requirement. Not only did the vote take place without the e-Dean’s input or participation, but the number of e-sorors who actually voted did not represent the majority of active e-sorors on e-campus.
After review of the situation and further discussion about her contributions to the e-line, we felt that Owlet2 would be given the chance to finish her e-process.
*Stands back and expects to get wrecked by La Bella Mafia and wishes her e-LS was here to help re-enact the Nancy Kerrigan/Kristie Yamaguchi fight scene from back in the day.*
*Makes Owlet2 sip her punch first to make sure it’s not poisoned*
|
|
|
|
Post by Chal™ on Jul 23, 2010 14:07:12 GMT -5
*starts a slow clap*
Well said, Sapphire.
|
|
|
|
Post by Southie on Jul 23, 2010 14:14:33 GMT -5
So the purpose of the vote last week was?? I missed that part. Oh, and nobody thought Egg2 should be dropped? And nobody discussed the manner? Bring me up to spead with that discussion...clearly I was offline when that took place. Oh, so the E-Board has no input in the decision making process of who is E-Online? Where is the E-parlimentarian? |
|
|
|
Post by Sapphire on Jul 23, 2010 14:25:51 GMT -5
So the purpose of the vote last week was?? I missed that part. I missed that part. Not sure, I was not able to participate. Oh, and nobody thought Egg2 should be dropped? And nobody discussed the manner? Bring me up to spead with that discussion...clearly I was offline when that took place. Yes, everyone that voted agreed that Egg2 should have been dropped; however only 7 people voted out of 16+ active e-sorors. Chal and I dropped Egg3 and put her back on e-line and nobody said anything… just sayin’ Oh, so the E-Board has no input in the decision making process of who is E-Online? Every e-soror has input on who makes the e-line… including the e-board. There has never been an instance where the e-board or the e-chapter has been involved in determining if an e-pledge got dropped. That’s something that we can implement moving forward… I was mainly clarifying the current situation and indicating that protocol was not breached. Y’all are adding in new stuff and calling it protocol. Fortunately we haven’t had many people dropped in the past, so this hasn’t been an issue. Where is the E-parlimentarian? *looks around* |
|
|
|
Post by IvyByDesign on Jul 23, 2010 14:29:00 GMT -5
:sips her Perrier with lime and still looks confuzzled:
hmmmmm
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 14:31:30 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but the e-ADP was present when it was motioned and e-2nd for a vote on all the e-Eggs fate. The e--ADP even made the voting thread and counted the numbers, and AGREED with Egg 2 being dropped. When the DP isn't around, the e-ADP steps up and that is what she did. She did not have a problem with the e-voting and even announced HERSELF that based off the e-votes, Egg 2 was dropped. She represented the e-membership committee and made everything final because you were busy IRL. When you came back Sapphy, you didn't even say anything about Egg 2 being dropped but agreed. So I'm not understanding.
This was done before, with Chal's e-line and I wanted to say something then, but I did not because I wasn't the e-president.
We did not have the issue of who needed to be dropped and them coming back because the previous DP's and E-ADP's were in one accord with the e-members and once that person was dropped, that was it. End of discussion. There didn't need to be a e-vote because it was expressed during the e-sets. And there was this no coming back once e-dropped.
Sapphy, were you brought back on to pick back up where you left off when your whole e-line was dropped? You had to start ALL over again. And it was a consenus of the whole chapter for that to happen to your e-line, even though we didn't do an official e-vote.
And, it seems that people are not quite understanding what the role of the e-Dean and e-ADP is. It is the e-chapter who decides who to bring in and what not, and it's the e-Dean and e-ADP to FACILIATE the e-process, but it is not solely up to the e-Deans and e-ADP to drop someone off the e-line and then put them back on, then drop again, put back on, etc.
We gave Egg 2 her chance when we voted to e-put her on, and the e-process was for her to PROVE we made the right decision. She did not meet the approval.
I didn't think this was needed before, but now I realize that we DO need to have an e-pledging manual of what is and isn't expected of the e-DP and e-ADP. Because things have ran so smoothly before I didn't think we needed it (partly because I guess a person who was always apart of the e-process was actually greek IRL and some things were just understood).
In starting this e-committee, I appoint Southie as chairman.
|
|
|
|
Post by Southie on Jul 23, 2010 14:52:38 GMT -5
When conducting an E-intake, all concerns regarding the "potential members", should be addressed directly to both the E-Dean and E-Assistant Dean. If there is a question on the floor regarding the process, either the E-dean or E-Assistant should bring it to the E-Financial body. All E-Financial members would discuss the situation, and if a vote is needed...i.e continuing with E-intake, the voting body must vote. Again,this is based on the informaiton provided by the E-Dean or E-Assistant Dean. Now, in this case their is a discrepancy with Egg 2 and Egg3 and the comunication regarding their "continued process". The E-Dean and E-Assistant Dean are to be present the issues to the body.
The E-President has called a question to the floor and we are still not clear on all evidence that has been provided. No motions are needed at this time, however we do need to get a final report from the E-Dean and the E-Assistant Dean. Once that has been reviewed....(this should be done via the Pm's.) we can then move to the next step.
At this time, the process is still in motion with all original Eggs at work...this right here is "technically" a no-no, however lets move forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sapphire on Jul 23, 2010 15:02:10 GMT -5
Just to clarify, when I came back I did not agree to anything. I indicated that I needed to catch up to see what I missed. I then spoke with Chal, the Eggs, read the threads, etc. to see what transpired. Yes, Chal did voted for the drop but agreed to have her come back.
And no, RR and I did not start from scratch when we were dropped. We layed low for the week or two we were off and then finished our e-process without the others.
And maybe there was confusing about who has the authority to drop people from e-line… I was told that it was solely up to the e-Deans and e-ADPs. Regardless, there was never a 50% majority vote from the e-chapter.
And yes, I’m all for have an e-pledging manual so there are no issues in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by Southie on Jul 23, 2010 15:11:35 GMT -5
At this point, and at this stage in the process I think we should continue with the process...despite the miscommunication. I wil work on the E-intake handbook and then have a meeting with the E-membership committee.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chal™ on Jul 23, 2010 15:26:36 GMT -5
I just want the record to show that I did not vote yay or nay in the dropping of Egg 2. due to IRL job related issues I did not make it to the thread before the poll locked. The motion and second was pt on the floor, so yes, I created the thread. In the time allotted, everyone was not able to / did not vote, so the decision to drop Egg 2 was based of of the majority of those who did.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 15:35:09 GMT -5
So the purpose of the vote last week was?? I missed that part. I missed that part. Not sure, I was not able to participate. Yes, everyone that voted agreed that Egg2 should have been dropped; however only 7 people voted out of 16+ active e-sorors. Chal and I dropped Egg3 and put her back on e-line and nobody said anything… just sayin’ Every e-soror has input on who makes the e-line… including the e-board. There has never been an instance where the e-board or the e-chapter has been involved in determining if an e-pledge got dropped. That’s something that we can implement moving forward… I was mainly clarifying the current situation and indicating that protocol was not breached. Y’all are adding in new stuff and calling it protocol. Fortunately we haven’t had many people dropped in the past, so this hasn’t been an issue. Where is the E-parlimentarian? *looks around* Bold part, point of clairification because that is not true. I can't count the last time we had that many e-sorors at an e-event or e-meeting, so that information is not correct. The 7 count number is correct, so that represent a majority. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 15:36:09 GMT -5
Just to clarify, when I came back I did not agree to anything. I indicated that I needed to catch up to see what I missed. I then spoke with Chal, the Eggs, read the threads, etc. to see what transpired. Yes, Chal did voted for the drop but agreed to have her come back. And no, RR and I did not start from scratch when we were dropped. We layed low for the week or two we were off and then finished our e-process without the others. And maybe there was confusing about who has the authority to drop people from e-line… I was told that it was solely up to the e-Deans and e-ADPs. Regardless, there was never a 50% majority vote from the e-chapter. And yes, I’m all for have an e-pledging manual so there are no issues in the future. Please clarify who gave you this information? |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 15:37:35 GMT -5
When conducting an E-intake, all concerns regarding the "potential members", should be addressed directly to both the E-Dean and E-Assistant Dean. If there is a question on the floor regarding the process, either the E-dean or E-Assistant should bring it to the E-Financial body. All E-Financial members would discuss the situation, and if a vote is needed...i.e continuing with E-intake, the voting body must vote. Again,this is based on the informaiton provided by the E-Dean or E-Assistant Dean. Now, in this case their is a discrepancy with Egg 2 and Egg3 and the comunication regarding their "continued process". The E-Dean and E-Assistant Dean are to be present the issues to the body. The E-President has called a question to the floor and we are still not clear on all evidence that has been provided. No motions are needed at this time, however we do need to get a final report from the E-Dean and the E-Assistant Dean. Once that has been reviewed....(this should be done via the Pm's.) we can then move to the next step. At this time, the process is still in motion with all original Eggs at work...this right here is "technically" a no-no, however lets move forward. Underlined, I assumed with Egg 3, it was part of the e-game we play to see if the e-line has any sisterhood. I never thought she was ever really e-dropped. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 15:39:16 GMT -5
I just want the record to show that I did not vote yay or nay in the dropping of Egg 2. due to IRL job related issues I did not make it to the thread before the poll locked. The motion and second was pt on the floor, so yes, I created the thread. In the time allotted, everyone was not able to / did not vote, so the decision to drop Egg 2 was based of of the majority of those who did. My point is you didn't negate the vote, nor did you mention that we should wait until Sapphy get back, which gave the indication you were ok with this.  |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 15:45:26 GMT -5
I do agree with the recommendation of the e-chair to move forward with the e-process as is so we can go ahead finish.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 23, 2010 15:48:15 GMT -5
At this point, and at this stage in the process I think we should continue with the process... despite the miscommunication. I wil work on the E-intake handbook and then have a meeting with the E-membership committee. Underlined, I've felt this way about this e-process for a while. That is why I said no more YIMs and talking in PMs because the whole e-membership had no idea what was going on, which is never good. |
|
|
|
Post by Chal™ on Jul 23, 2010 15:55:05 GMT -5
My point is you didn't negate the vote, nor did you mention that we should wait until Sapphy get back, which gave the indication you were ok with this. if someone makes a motion and someone seconds, then that's that. I can't tell you not to vote on something you feel strongly about. As e-adp, i did what was expected and created that thread. Now I don't deny that there were many who DID/DO want Owlet 2 gone, but in that second vote, there were some who wanted her to stay. |
|
|
|
Post by Chal™ on Jul 23, 2010 15:59:10 GMT -5
help me understand this, though. Is it the fact that she's back or the fact that you weren't asked if she could come back that has everyone e-upset?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gamma on Jul 23, 2010 16:09:22 GMT -5
On a totally unrelated note (well not totally) their nest is now the 5th thread, and its sinking quickly.
As for the issue at hand... I was thrown off by the fact that I read the re-add in the thread, looked up at the top of the page for [1 new message] and didn't find it there. Warning/information helps.
|
|
{=}http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif{/=}
