Please reconsider. Otherwise the project's sole alternative may be to
replace the Project Secretary.
Let me get this straight --
You (a seconder of the winning option) now believe that we need to stop and re-open
discussion on a closed matter that the whole project voted on (which I believe you've
been a staunch advocate for in the past - GRs are good, democracy, etc, right?),
single-handedly overturning the results, because you now have changed your views
on your own amendment that won, and you now believe the constitution is weakened
such that you're now threatening to remove the Secretary because you disagree with
their reading of the rules (who's executed the role of reading those rules since 2009
without prior issue) that is their role in the project to read?
Just checking. Do I have that right?
Paul
--
:wq