Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I really love this. If we don't get any responses within a few days, I'll turn it into a proposal for council discussion, then agreement seeking.
I just responded to you on the vote thread. Long story short, I agree that this is about encouraging, and the chapter needs to set its own manageable goals.The intent is to keep moving forward in party building.
In short, Michael, the chapter makes that determination. The idea here is to support a chapter's work of partybuilding, and it encourages the chapter to adopt some sort of plan.We're all volunteer, and the state party needs to support a chapter's efforts. It creates dialog between chapter and state party so that the state party can get creative about mobilizing forces. You have already shown yourself to be engaged in partybuilding, even just by helping out at the People's Fair. I think you could agree that a plan and goals are a good thing.Thanks for hearing me out.
I can totally understand where you're coming from. For me, we know that an individual can block, and they don't have to wait for a chapter to block. It should follow that individuals then vote on their own.
Harry, did you see this: http://www.coloradogreenparty.org/3814/annual-meeting-2015-announced/
Harry, we're not offering open-wide remote access. It's only for chapters, and I'm offering it directly to those members.Our meeting is open to the public, and in-person public attendance is sufficient.However, if you have a voting member of your chapter that absolutely cannot take advantage of your car pool, please get me their email address and/or Skype handle so I can connect with them.Thanks.
Thanks for asking, Harry, but no. Rank-and-file voters are free to do as they wish, but to cast votes regarding the direction of a chapter's growth and goals takes a different level of commitment. And voting in another primary takes a change in voter affiliation in Colorado.
"Members of a Green local may vote on state issues at general state meetings and may serve on the Council."
Why would we let non-Greens have a say in the way we run our party? Our raison d'etre is to build a different way from the duopoly. Can you see how allowing registered members of the duopoly dictate how we strengthen our party, ultimately serves to weaken it? What motivation would there be to vote according to the needs of the Green Party of Colorado? Doesn't that open us up to sabotage, much the way saboteurs infect primaries in open primary states?If you can show me where the Democrats and/or Republicans allow non-affiliated persons to cast votes in their central committees, to vote on such material issues as bylaws or officers (for example), then I might be swayed.Absent that, with all due respect, I cannot entertain such an amendment.
All a rank and file member needs to do is simply register and re-register. But officers and chapters have a different responsibility.
