In message , Cherry 
Chapstick <azure@invalid.really.really> wrote:
>"Where 90 days have elapsed since the publication of the first RFD,
>the committee may direct that no further RFDs shall be published, but
>that the proposal shall either proceed to a vote within 40 days of the
>present RFD or be withdrawn. Any vote resulting from such a decision
>by the committee shall include the option ROD (re-open discussion).
>Where the RFD is concerned with the committee constitution, and the
>committee has not acted to curtail discussion within 130 days, the RFD
>shall proceed as if the committee had done so."
>
>The committee, it seems, can over-ride the discussion of RFDs.  This
>could be used in a sort of usenet filibuster, continually sending an
>RFD back for further discussion, or could be used to send an unfit RFD
>to the vote, or can force an RFD to be withdrawn.

No, it's an *anti*-filibuster measure. The committee has the power to 
restrict discussion on a single topic to around 4 months. If they do so, 
the electorate can override them by voting to reopen discussion. Only on 
the third time (i.e. after a *year* of discussion) do they get to force 
a final vote.

However, the committee can't filibuster an RFD at all, since the 
proponent can always take it to a vote.

Finally, as ever, if the committee act unreasonably they risk facing a 
MoNC. That's a major reason people are willing to trust them with this 
discretion.

>but as I read it, it is perfectly
>possible for the committe to 'do' stuff instead of just responding to
>RFDs from the electorate.

Please quote anything in the guidelines that allows the committee to 
'do' something that isn't reactive.

>The engine behind the decisions made
>by the committee can, in some instances, reside in the prejudices
>inherent in the make up of the committee.

True. We are human [1].

See above about MoNCs.

[1] Well, I am. I can't vouch for any of the others, not having me them.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather                  | Home: 
Mobile: +44 7973 377646             | Web:  <http://www.davros.org>
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: