Bill #2
January 20, 2019
The entire section titled ?Yearbook? is removed from the Personnel Department edICT (PDICT) bylaw.
Adam W.
President
Very well, I hereby Veto Adam W. Bill #2, for the following reasons:
-
The best example I found in my research of a removal of a section of bylaw, was DeSpain Bill #1. There was replacement text going in of course, but the entirety of the section was changed enough that, in my opinion, it was essentially a new section of a bylaw.
-
It is the opinion of this panel that your wording as it stands is not making it very clear how the bylaw is now supposed to be read, as well as not really explaining why the change was really necessary (ie: poor wording, changing wording to reflect a change in department struction, etc.). Remember these bills need to survive historical tests, that is, someone reading this 10 years down the road when everyone who discussed it is gone (or can’t remember the discussion entirely, both of which are completely possible scenarios) may misinterpret. That is why bills should include a changelog that identify, as best as possible, WHY the change is being made.
-Kat
To keep this clean. I second this veto of Adam W. Bill #2.
Steve Johnson - EGO