[ProgSoc] 2 "A"GMs? (Re: ProgSoc AGM 2015 -- 14th October)

Tomislav Bozic tomchristmas at progsoc.org
Mon Oct 5 23:52:16 AEDT 2015


> they don't record the rationale, which was my question.

Then, "to be in line with other clubs' AGM schedules at UTS", should be
closer to the answer you seek. There's not much more I can say beyond
that.

>> P.S. There were *two* AGMs in 1997, BTW -- you were there ;)
>
> This is misleading.

I know. My remark was a gross oversimplification of an extraordinary event :P

Tom

> Those clauses merely indicate that the decision to hold two AGMs this
> year was made and duly recorded, which is fair enough if a little odd;
> they don't record the rationale, which was my question.
>
> Also, I just noticed your postscript:
>
>> P.S. There were *two* AGMs in 1997, BTW -- you were there ;)
>
> This is misleading. Although two overlapping sets of people met at two
> different times and in two different places - which in the plain English
> sense of the word describes two meetings - in the formal sense of an
> organisation's annual meeting, the two sessions formed a single AGM the
> second session being an adjournment of the first. The formal items
> (apologies, reading of minutes, elections, etc.) happened exactly once
> each, most/all of them at the adjourned session. That is not this year's
> situation.
>
>
> - Raz
>
>
>
> On 10/05/2015 08:08 PM, Tomislav Bozic wrote:
>> Section 5.1.3. and 5.1.3.1. of the Constitution[1] should answer your
>> question.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> ---
>>
>> [1] http://progsoc.org/wiki?title=Constitution&oldid=5420
>>
>>> I can certainly see the rationale for operating in line with the
>>> Union's
>>> norms, but would have thought this would mean simply moving _*next*_
>>> year's AGM (and subsequent ones) to October. Why hold a second one this
>>> year?
>>>
>>> - Raz
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/05/2015 07:50 PM, Tomislav Bozic wrote:
>>>> Hi Raz,
>>>>
>>>> At the first AGM in March, we voted to move AGMs to October to be in
>>>> line
>>>> with other clubs at UTS. Hence the second meeting this year.
>>>>
>>>> Because of the change, we will only be having two "A"GMs this year.
>>>> Next
>>>> year, we will revert to just one actual - "annual" - meeting, although
>>>> it
>>>> will take place in October, not March, as in previous years.
>>>>
>>>> I know it's not exactly the most precise use of the terminology
>>>> "annual
>>>> general meeting", nonetheless, it best describes the activities that
>>>> will
>>>> be carried out at that meeting in a succinct manner.
>>>>
>>>> Tom
>>>>
>>>> P.S. There were *two* AGMs in 1997, BTW -- you were there ;)
>>>>
>>>>> I meant to ask earlier: much as I admire the enthusiasm evidenced by
>>>>> holding more frequent meetings, an AGM happens - by definition - once
>>>>> a
>>>>> year. For folks who may have missed the detail: why are we having a
>>>>> second one?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Raz
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 09/29/2015 03:08 PM, Carlin Rookes wrote:
>>>>>> AGM Update
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As the agenda has already been distributed, we will simply state
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> during the meeting and record no actions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also please forward all nominations and proxies to
>>>>>> progsocsecretary at gmail.com <mailto:progsocsecretary at gmail.com> to
>>>>>> avoid spamming the mailing list. A list of nominations will be
>>>>>> compiled and published as necessary. Toms nominations have been
>>>>>> noted,
>>>>>> however any future nomination must be sent directly to the
>>>>>> secretary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> Carlin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 29 Sep 2015, at 2:57 pm, Roland Turner <roland at rolandturner.com
>>>>>>> <mailto:roland at rolandturner.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In that case, they should perhaps be removed from the AGM agenda.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Noting the other part of 8.2 "Notice of motions concerning any
>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>> amendments shall be lodged with the Secretary at least twenty-one
>>>>>>> (21) days prior to the date of such meeting" meaning that it's too
>>>>>>> late to lodge constitutional amendment motions for a meeting that's
>>>>>>> only 15 days away, consequently no constitutional amendment motions
>>>>>>> can be put at the meeting.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Roland
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 09/29/2015 12:50 PM, Carlin Rookes wrote:
>>>>>>>> There have been no proposed amendments received.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 29 Sep 2015, at 2:48 pm, Roland Turner
>>>>>>>>> <roland at rolandturner.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd suggest sharing the text of any proposed constitutional
>>>>>>>>> amendments (item 4) fairly promptly. Note in particular clause
>>>>>>>>> 8.2
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/wiki/Constitution#8.2_Amendment_Notice>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ... at least seven (7) days notice shall be given of such
>>>>>>>>>> proposed
>>>>>>>>>> amendments to every member ...
>>>>>>>>> That's explicit: a post on a notice board or a reading at the
>>>>>>>>> meeting is not sufficient by itself.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Raz
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 09/29/2015 12:43 PM, Tomislav Bozic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Sent on behalf of the Secretary...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's that time of year again, and UTS ProgSoc will be holding
>>>>>>>>>> elections
>>>>>>>>>> and other general business at our Annual General Meeting.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Date: 14th October 2015
>>>>>>>>>> Time: 6pm
>>>>>>>>>> Location: UTS Loft
>>>>>>>>>> For executive nominations, please email name + position to
>>>>>>>>>> progsoc at progsoc.org  .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> AGENDA:
>>>>>>>>>> 1. Apologies
>>>>>>>>>> 2. Reading of the Minutes
>>>>>>>>>> 3. Executive Reports
>>>>>>>>>> 4. Constitution Amendments
>>>>>>>>>> 5. Elections
>>>>>>>>>> 6. General business / unscheduled business
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Nicholas Kobal
>>>>>>>>>> ProgSoc Secretary
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Progsoc mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Progsoc mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org <mailto:Progsoc at progsoc.org>
>>>>>>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Progsoc mailing list
>>>>>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org
>>>>>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Progsoc mailing list
>>>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org
>>>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Progsoc mailing list
>>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org
>>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Progsoc mailing list
>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org
>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Progsoc mailing list
> Progsoc at progsoc.org
> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>
>


-- 
To judiciously use split infinitives is fine by me...




More information about the Progsoc mailing list