I agree with you that it is disappointing but if all branches and groups were asked to vote against the motion and were misled by John Dolan then I am not surprised at all.

Why is a motion passed at a GM advisory only? Does that mean that Council would have gone ahead anyway?

What I would like to know is what happens as the numbers don't tally???

I shall be thinking seriously about renewing my membership.

By the way are there proxy votes at the AGM?

Regards
Miranda

On 08/07/2013 16:56, CHARLES OPPENHEIM wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
I was disappointed, but not surprised by the vote.  Lots of people will have followed John Dolan's advice, perhaps misled that voting for would stop all rebranding.  But what did surprise me was the statement that a motion passed at a GM is advisory only.  This makes the idea that a vote for would stop the rebranding exercise in its tracks nonsense.

Let us hope that CILIP Council got the message loud and clear that the surveys so far are fatally flawed, and produces a better evidence base in time for the AGM.

I remain deeply unimpressed by the way the whole business has been handled.

Charles
 
Professor Charles Oppenheim
From: Frances Hendrix <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, 8 July 2013, 16:44
Subject: Re: CILIP General Meeting #CILIP

Left in disgust?
 
And I hear from Twitter that all branches and groups were asked to vote against the motion, is that true? Where do branches and Groups get their money?
f
 
From: Library and Information Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Catherine Phillpotts
Sent: 08 July 2013 16:09
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: CILIP General Meeting #CILIP
 
Some people left before the meeting ended and perhaps took their ballot papers with them?
 
Cathy

******************************************************
Catherine Phillpotts BA (Hons), MA, MCLIP
Interim Director of Library Services
London Metropolitan University
Holloway Road Learning Centre
236 Holloway Road
London N7 6PP
 
020 7133 2101
 
Follow Library Services on Facebook and Twitter
******************************************************
 
On 8 July 2013 15:37, Sarah Humphrey <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
The sums don't seem to add up.

1513 proxy votes + 97 present in the room (figures according to Twitter) = 1610

804 votes against + 752 for + 16 abstentions = 1572 votes.

So not everyone present voted??

Thanks to Tom Roper for his efforts.

Sarah Humphrey
CILIP Overseas Member
Netherlands
From:
David McMenemy <[log in to unmask]>
To:
[log in to unmask]
Date:
08/07/2013 16:22
Subject:
Re: CILIP General Meeting #CILIP
Sent by:
Library and Information Professionals <[log in to unmask]>
 



The motion was defeated at the general meeting this afternoon:

804 to 752

I'd assume the rebrand now proceeds as a result.

Sincere gratitude to Tom for all his efforts on this.


This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only. The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its content is not permitted. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
  
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
 
Companies Act 2006 : http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/companyinfo