Legitimacy of the Page
Agreed Minhaaj, I was surprised to see this page and only came across it today when Wayne started a 2nd Agenda page. Given the velocity of your and my objections to the Nominated Members, Brent's uncertainty about it, Leutha's concerns (all on the First Agenda Page in the Debate section), as well as Steve's proposals for alternative ways to handle this (on the Email forum), and Bronwyn's comment on the [The Draft Policy Discussion page] (no doubt I have missed some places), it seems very presumptuous of Wayne to start this page.
However, evidently Wayne was confident enough to start this page regardless of the uncertainty, and a number of others have engaged in this page and by doing so are expressing their support for this Nominations process. It is a concern to me that this action and support goes ahead without the others engaging in the debate, or the discussions, or the alternative proposals for it. So either there are other discussion going on elsewhere that we are not aware of that gives them a sense that this is the agreed process, and we are alienated from the Council all together, or the sheer chaotic number of pages and channels for communication going on has broken down communication and no one knows what is happening but for a few people taking action regardless.
Where discussion has taken place so far:
There is divided opinion on the question of nominated members. Those who support the notion of nominated members have the freedom to submit their names for nominated members in accordance with the draft policy.
This is why I believe that it is appropriate and prudent to get a clear mandate from the Community via a referendum on these questions.