NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: Proposed Items for the Meet the Candidates call tomorrow: Transparency and coordination in Council
From:
James Gannon <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
James Gannon <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:47:59 +0000
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1096 bytes) , text/html (2950 bytes) 
Im sorry but I entirely disagree with this, this is an incorrect description of directed voting, it is not censorship in any way.

Its accountability of our councillors to ensure that the NCSG is being represented In the way the reflects the feels of the majority of the members, we are the only constituency that does not direct its votes.





-Jmaes



From: NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Remmy Nweke <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

Reply-To: Remmy Nweke <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

Date: Wednesday 17 August 2016 at 11:43

To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

Subject: Re: Proposed Items for the Meet the Candidates call tomorrow: Transparency and coordination in Council



As much as I want us to strengthen the accountability process, it amounts to gagging or censoring the councillors in the case of directed voting.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2