Difference between revisions of "Talk:Oversight Board/Decisions"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "I am not sure why Motion 2017-11 was changed from Failed to Agreed. I followed the email thread and did not see the votes in favor of this motion. In fact, there is an email i...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I am not sure why Motion 2017-11 was changed from Failed to Agreed. I followed the email thread and did not see the votes in favor of this motion. In fact, there is an email in the thread from Laura saying that the motion failed. It remains unclear as to whether or not the appropriate data has been passed along to CJL. James offered to help someone create the build, so it remains to be explained why we need the professional service contract. --[[User:Walter|Walter]] ([[User talk:Walter|talk]]) 16:29, 20 September 2017 (EDT) | I am not sure why Motion 2017-11 was changed from Failed to Agreed. I followed the email thread and did not see the votes in favor of this motion. In fact, there is an email in the thread from Laura saying that the motion failed. It remains unclear as to whether or not the appropriate data has been passed along to CJL. James offered to help someone create the build, so it remains to be explained why we need the professional service contract. --[[User:Walter|Walter]] ([[User talk:Walter|talk]]) 16:29, 20 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
| + | :Looks like a mistake; a misidentification of 2017-13, caused by looking for a budget measure but not reading through to the end of the motion 2017-11. I've received no input from anyone wanting to create this build, so my guess is either the need wasn't there or someone was able to read the documentation for the builder. I've not heard from CJL lately. --[[User:Quozl|Quozl]] ([[User talk:Quozl|talk]]) 16:54, 20 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 16:54, 20 September 2017
I am not sure why Motion 2017-11 was changed from Failed to Agreed. I followed the email thread and did not see the votes in favor of this motion. In fact, there is an email in the thread from Laura saying that the motion failed. It remains unclear as to whether or not the appropriate data has been passed along to CJL. James offered to help someone create the build, so it remains to be explained why we need the professional service contract. --Walter (talk) 16:29, 20 September 2017 (EDT)
- Looks like a mistake; a misidentification of 2017-13, caused by looking for a budget measure but not reading through to the end of the motion 2017-11. I've received no input from anyone wanting to create this build, so my guess is either the need wasn't there or someone was able to read the documentation for the builder. I've not heard from CJL lately. --Quozl (talk) 16:54, 20 September 2017 (EDT)