[Community-Discuss] Comments from GovCom Communique

[Ronald F. Guilmette]

In message <39D45032-ACDE-4846-A2BC-7C93CECA83CC at liquidtelecom.com>, 
Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:

>I mean as it is you have 3 seats that should be on the ballot in my view that
>aren't - that's a third of the board - 2 more seats that agreed to align with
>the 3 "appointees" - you have a majority and you have organizational capture. 
>This cannot be allowed to happen

Point of clarification, Andrew, if you please:

Are you suggesting that IF some party or parties were somehow able to take
control of five (or more) board seats that said party or parties might,
in theory, take some decisions or actions that might be contrary to the
best interests of the membership as a whole?

And if so, who would possibly ever want to do such a nefarious thing?


Regards,
rfg