Subject: [discussion]<Chen Dong> Re: HQ's operation

From: [email-masked] (priv=-10 D.C.)
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 94 17:37:11 -0500

I agree with what Zhang Feng posted.
After reviewing the whole event unfolded so far, I am unsatisfied with HQ
for many of its handling of the matter. 

HQ could cooperate much better, and communicate with our council members
more often. Their side should take some responsibility for the mess now.
And future HQ should learn the lesson.

	Meanwhile, even I viewed a lot of HQ's action non-professional, but
not yet be able to find them violent any rule explictly (this might be still
debate-able and we should investigate further in the future).

	However the HQ had done, though, it gives no right for our council
members to violent the rule ourselves. Within the system, we have formal
procedures to solve the dispute. But these important links are missing. Worst,
the rule violentions just went too far later on. Here's the simplified
conversation between me and Hongguang last night. I take fully responsiblity
for what I post here.

Chen Dong:	Did you sign on the meeting ? I notice you are actively on
		network, maybe you just forgot to send a formal sign on
		letter.
Zhou Hongguang:	[do not want to admit, but finally said] I did not sign on.
C:	The bylaw requires every council member to attend the meeting.
Z:	Dong Liqun called off the meeting.
C:	If you signed on, then we had the quorum, and the meeting won't be
	called off. What about before Liqun called off ?
Z:	I did not received the call for emeeting, the council network
	wasn't working.
C:	I also send a personal mail to you of the package.
Z:	I didn't receive it.
C:	I called you before the meeting start, and informed you in person.
Z:	It was early at the morning, I don't remember what we said.
[later after awhile, the same argue came back again]
C:	(something like no attending the meeting is violent the bylaw)
Z:	You have no right to impeach me.
C:	I didn't say I will impeach you now, I just tell you how serious
	you actions are.
Z:	Look at how stupid you are. What public image you think we will get
	when you proposed your resolutions.
C:	I welcome openly debate about my resolution. You can debate again
	and vote again my resolutions.
Z:	I am not going to vote.
C:	Can we openly confront about what we talked about tonight ?
Z:	I didn't say anything tonight.
C:	Then can I ask you again about these question ?
Z:	I don't need to talk to you.
C:	Fine, bye.

Now the nature question is what is the right way to solve the dispute ?
Here's outline of what I think we should have done:
	1. FC investigate the whole issue
	2. Report to council about the difficulty and the primer result
	3. Council issue resolutions if necessary
	4. (If HQ still not cooperate) Council appeal to SVC
	5. SVC and Council order HQ to follow the procedure
	6. (if still not resolved) SVC and Council gives a report to CSS
	   and possiblly call for impeachment of HQ.

Look at what we did ? The FC bypassed Council to issue News Release, Open
Letters. Individule member send memos in the whole Council's name.
Invited a third party for IT and went to DC without inform other council
member. Announce an Inspection Task Froce without inform other council member.
Boycott council meeting.... This just a few serious one I picked up.

Now, dear colleagues, do we need any common rules in the Council or not ?
Do you still think the FC can work professionally with such an emotion
involved ?
Just ask yourself, what do we want to achieve this term ?
Is this what we called professionalizing IFCSS ?

At the very begining, I stated that we should handle the whole issue
professional way. I proposed to hire a CPA right between the first
tele-conference. But I was told, if we hire a CPA, we will ruin IFCSS's
reputation because there are a lot of dark side story there; we can not
afford to hire a CPA; we will be put in jail if we hire a CPA; we want
protect IFCSS's name not expose the issue to public.
And look what we got.

Think it over, please post your opinion and cast your vote.

Dong Chen,

          __                                         Mail address:
   ______/ /301-405-5025(O)____301-314-9437(fax)     Dong Chen
  / ____/ /_  ___  ___    / __ \____  ___  ____(C)   LPR, Univ. of Maryland
 / /   / __ \/ _ \/ _ \  / / / / __ \/ _ \/ __ \     College Park, MD 20742
/ /___/ / / /  __/ // / / /_/ / /_/ / // / /_/ / Email: [email-masked]
\____/_/ /_/\___/_//_/ /_____/\____/_//_/\__  /  "Do you know why communist
 __________________________________________/ /    can not be a good C++
/___________________________________________/     programer ?"   --D.C.

---

From: Hongguang Zhou <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 1994 17:56:17 -0500 (EST)

To: IFCSS Council
From: Zhou Hongguang, the Council Member from the Southeast
RE: Chen Dong's claim
Date: 1/19/94

Who is the Council Chair? Seems Mr Chen Dong is functioning as the Chair
by claiming the council is in meeting while Dong Liqun has called off the
meeting last Saturday, which was confirmed by Shen Tong. We are not sure
what's happened to the Council-l to which Dong Liqun sent his
announcement ( as a matter of fact, I and other members lost many
important mails after we sent them to council-l), but we do know it is who has
wildly sent numuous mails with lots of claims to the Council-l and is still
cliaming the already-called-off meeting is still on. We would like to ask
Mr. Chen Dong: Has Dong Liqun switched his resposibility of the Council
Chair to you? When? By what means? As the Chair of the Council Rules
Committee, you'd better to follow the rules.

Another thing is that I said NOTING to Mr. Chen Dong last night as he
claimed in his mail, which may be a day-dream product of his. Because I've
already learned a lesson from the fact that my previous words in a
telephone conversation with a former IFCSS officer was exploited by others,
I have never say anything over telephone to anyone who is with unnamed
motivations ever since.