The firs topic was addressed :
1. Unaffiliated Individual Member criteria
Article 27.5.2. Unaffiliated Individual Member criteria Says the applicant should not be a member of an existing ALS:
- is this valid?
Enforcing the above criteria: trust the initial affidavit or "trust but verify".
Questions/perspectives shared by members:
-How about ongoing verification?
-How to keep a check on whether the eligibility remains valid?
- Can we go for an annual declaration or affidavit?
- Any membership should have a time limit and should have a renewal process, whether it is an individual or ALS membership.
- Requirement of "Not be a member of an ALS has two levels of difficulties: 1) is this fair? 2) How do we make sure this requirement is validated.
- What about if the ALS is dormant, whose member wants to be an "unaffiliated individual member".
- Such situations should be dealt with on a case by case basis- we are trying to encourage as much participation as possible.
- Stress encouragement members of ALS to be more engagement- all members of ALS are members by default. They should be encouraged by their representatives.
CONSENSUS clause “27.5.2.3 Not be a member of a certified ALS " should continue.
Other questions:
- Would "renewal" /time limits for membership be proposed for ALSes as well as Unaffiliated Member's ?
- Should the application form be revised?
- Should we simplify the process/application form?
- Safeguards - should we include requirements for individuals in a Code of Conduct
- There can be a limited duration of being inactive at all,maybe one year of a complete loss of connection or interaction.
Conclusion: Put more rigor into the Code of conduct , rights based or merits based.
