Synbad wrote:
Jim.. You're facts aren't really facts.. The fact is this board including the current president have been making decisions for years.
Including voting in the previous president unanimously.. Till they had to make a move on the guy they all thought was a great idea as president for years.
Also their change to the constitution is undemocratic..
Anybody should be allowed to run.. As long as they hold a current membership
Which means I'm out boys.
Robbie.. You and your dad shouldn't both be on.. It's akin to our current bloc faction problem.
Synners that was the entire criteria previously: you had to be a member for 2 years prior to nominating yourself, and you had to fill out a form. They didn't take any of your business history into account, despite it being a legal requirement for businesses today.
Once again, here is the constitution:

So what that says is:
- Be a member for two years prior
- Don't be banned from sitting on a board
- Fill out the nomination form and cooperate with the INC
- Prove any other requirements as determined by the INC (currently none)
- Ensure you'll get the necessary approval to be involved with a business that has liquour and gaming licences
Right now it sounds like you'd fail to be able to nominate because you don't have a membership. That's it.
If you read the current requirements, I'd suggest the INC would merely add on new requirements as legal requirements themselves change. If they tack on something stupid, it'll be kicked off at the next AGM.