Remove committee member

[fattyhope]

More explicit than the three months rule, I wanted to shorten it because a committee member can easily join a meeting for let's say 5 minutes and they would be exempt from this "rule".

We had several people kicked from the committee due to this rule and I strongly believe that 3 months is simply too long.

[49Indium]

I'm a bit confused about what $x$ is here? Quinn and Ben Paul seem to have a similar concern.

[JamesDearlove]

I'm heavily against changing this, this is already a last last resort and shouldn't be used as a way to get out of T3 being harder on committee members who aren't engaging in running the club. This is no attack on any committee member, it's my opinions on running a volunteer run club.

Additionally, complicating what is a relatively simple clause is not ideal, there is a number of issues including what is a "reasonable pardon" and no definition of $x$ (edit: I didn't read above 🙈)

[fattyhope]

I'm a bit confused about what x is here? Quinn and Ben Paul seem to have a similar concern.

Will update it to provide more clarity later. Thanks for noting this

[bradleysigma]

Nor is there a definition of the T3 council is.

[bradleysigma]

I agree with Jimmy about the removal clause being the last resort. I'll quote myself from #46:

This change will automatically remove any committee member who doesn't attend a committee meeting for three months. This should not be seen as the minimum standard for committee members. Anybody who is removed by this clause should have either resigned or have been removed via the previous clause long before this clause can come into affect. This amendment serves only as a safety valve for when either alternative fails.

Also, given that exactly what $x$ is will have a vast effect on the impact of this clause (e.g. if it's a number of elapsed seconds vs number of elapsed years), it'd should be clarified while constitutional amendments may still be made (i.e. within the next hour for the AGM on Sept 19th). The T3 council doesn't need to be clarified with such urgency, given that the meaning is reasonably obvious.

Furthermore, what happens if no meeting happens in any given month? As the proposal is currently written, this means that all members of the management committee could be removed simultaneously (making probably Jimmy acting president).

Additionally, you note in your first post that someone could attend a meeting for five minutes and thus prevent being removed, but your proposal seems to do nothing to rectify that particular issue.

Finally, I'll add that the current wording purposely had no way for other members of the committee to grant an exception to the removal, as in the past committee members (from UQCS and other societies) have been hesitant to take action to remove other members to avoid being perceived as attacking those members.

[bradleysigma]

Hmmmm, given that it requires a minimum of attending one meeting, as worded it means that at the end of the AGM, and/or on the first of each month, the entire committee is removed (making probably Jimmy acting president).

Actually, it just says "meeting", so I suppose you could attend an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting and that would count for this clause.