More from Tony Stillman:
Mr. Gowen:
I guess I didn’t fully understand the question, or I didn’t understand
the process when I made that reply. Based on the Procedures book, the
Interim vote is to screen between the proposal and cross proposal. You
could not have both on the ballot, or you would have the ability to vote
for both, and it is a one-or-the-other type vote. I will look to make
that more obvious in the manual. The cross proposal is an alternate
means of accomplishing the objective of a basic proposal which passed
the initial vote. So, you have to select between one or the other.
When you vote for the Cross Proposal, it replaces the original. If the
cross proposal is rejected, the original is left in place. Then, the
final vote ballot has both the basic proposals that passed the initial
vote and were not replaced by a cross proposal that passed the interim
vote, and cross proposals that did replace a basic proposal that passed
the initial vote.
Sorry for that. I believe I am correct now, however. I reviewed past
interim votes and only cross proposals were on the ballots.
Tony Stillman
Flying Site Assistance Coordinator
Academy of Model Aeronautics
FSAC_at_modelaircraft.org <mailto:FSAC_at_modelaircraft.org>
Phone (800) 435-9262 ext. 230
On 8/25/2014 10:31 AM, William D. gowen wrote:
> I received the following response from Tony stillman this morning:
>
> "That is because there were no cross proposals for you to vote on. The
> interim vote deals only with those. So for IFF, the next and final
> step is the final vote process."
>
> Note that this is exactly opposite from what he told me in response to
> my questions on June 4 (his response in red):
>
> "2. Interim - Cross proposals may be submitted but ONLY for proposals
> that passed in the Initial vote. Proposals that passed the Initial
> phase are voted on again along with any cross proposals. Proposals
> that fail are done for this 2 year cycle.That is correct"
>
> In the voting in 2010 ALL proposals were on the Interim ballot. In
> 2012 there was only one proposal and a cross proposal to that was
> voted on in the interim ballot which would have happened in either
> interpretation of the process.
>
> I believe that today's interpretation makes more sense than what I was
> told previously but I wonder who made the "new" interpretation. I also
> wonder why the AMA rule book can not be written more clearly so that
> these misunderstandings don't happen in the first place.
>
> Bill Gowen
>
>
> On 8/23/2014 1:50 PM, William Gowen wrote:
>>
>> That's not the way it was explained to me. I was told specifically
>> that when s proposal passes it gets voted on again in the next round.
>> I think I posted Tony Stillman's response to my question about that.
>>
>> On Aug 23, 2014 1:45 PM, "Don Slusarczyk don_at_slusarczyk.com
>> <mailto:don_at_slusarczyk.com> [Indoor_Construction]"
>> <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
>> <mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe the interim ballot is just for cross proposals?
>>
>> Don
>>
>> On 8/23/2014 10:48 AM, wdgowen_at_gmail.com
>> <mailto:wdgowen_at_gmail.com> [Indoor_Construction] wrote:
>>>
>>> I realized recently that I had not received a rules change
>>> ballot for the interim vote. This was supposed to have been
>>> mailed out on Aug. 1 and was due back to AMA by Aug. 15. I sent
>>> an email to Tony Stillman last night but probably won't hear
>>> back until Monday.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Don Slusarczyk
>> www.DonsRC.com <http://www.DonsRC.com>
>> Home of the Wicked EDF Motors!
>>
>>
>
Received on Mon Aug 25 2014 - 09:15:25 CEST