RE: [VOTE] Change in CIS project structure

Thanks to all for the vote of confidence.  

Allan.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
> Behalf Of Ross Gardler
> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 1:49 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [cis] [VOTE] Change in CIS project structure
> 
> My personal circumstances are currently somewhat different to 
> how they were when this group was started. I no longer find I 
> have the time to focus on the management and coordination of 
> CIS. This has manifested itself with a lack of attention from 
> myself and a consequent reduction of productivity.
> 
> One of the reasons for this withdrawal is because of the 
> success of another project I am involved with. This has been 
> proposed as a member of the CIS group (see other thread).
> 
> Last week I had a meeting with Allan Samaroo who has recently 
> shown considerable interest in driving CIS forward. Allan 
> also sourced three of the machines in the CIS lab right at 
> the start of this excercise.
> Allan has agreed to do what he can to breath new life into CIS.
> 
> Therefore, I am proposing some changes to the structure of CIS:
> 
> 1) Karen Lequay is named as having a veto. However, Karen has 
> not been active here for some time. Therefore I feel her veto 
> should be revoked.
> 
> 2) I am no longer able to actively commit to the central CIS 
> project, consequently I propose that my veto be revoked. I 
> wish to remain a member of this community and will still use 
> my vote. However, I do not feel it is appropriate to maintain my veto.
> 
> 3) Nissan Dookeran was one of the original proponents of this project.
> He will shortly be returning to Trinidad and Tobago and I 
> would encourage you to keep him on board and allow him to 
> retain his veto.
> However, Nissan is currently fairly inactive here due to 
> commitments in Barbados.
> 
> 4) Allan Samaroo should be awarded a veto in my place since 
> he is active.
> 
> Of course I vote +1 to all these. This is a simple amjority 
> vote and lazy consensus applies.
> 
> Ross
>