Hello Janis,

 > > As I see it the failure to get a new policy adopted was
 > > partly due to Thom throwing sand in the cogs in order to
 > > get back at ward.

 > Your opinion, but I don't buy it. It was cleary up to a
 > vote by the RCs, and the RCs voted against the change.

Correction: not enough voted in favour of the change.

 > Nothing Thom did persuaded the vote one way or the other.

What he did was chase the voters away. That way not enough "yes"
voters remained to meet the quorum.

 > He merely asked questions to clarify certain topics which
 > Ward had failed to clarify.

Bullshit. he did not "merely ask quaetions" He issisted on going
thorough the denating phase all over again.

 > Ward should have clarifed them from the outset.

There was nothing to clearify.

 > > Also I think Thom was a major factor in the charade with the
 > > ZCC voting Ward out of the IC chair.

 > This one is really too much.

 > You show me ONE ounce of proof of your statement, Michiel,

He was one of the handfull that was crying for his replacement.

Cheers, Michiel

--- InterMail 229kx