Thanks to Bert for all his moderating work, thanks to Meadow for continuing with it, and thanks to AIoW and OI for joining the moderating team!! 🥳👏

Laurence: From my time on the DTB, I would say that "figment" is unfair. They are of course very summarised, and the nuance can be lost. It would be careless of the secretariat not to have minuted a decision by the DTB to approve the election rules, and careless of DTB members not to spot that, but I suppose it could happen.

SW, indeed. As you know everyone is my puppet! Mwahahaha!

Favouritism towards TBK!!

Dundonald - the minutes are an abbreviated figment of what is actually discussed.

TM, it wasn't my mistake. I believe it has been corrected very quickly after I raised it.

Sloppiness from the ESG again.

tbk - surely grounds for expulsion from the process - sloppy mistakes and all that ....

Apologies to Geoff Seel and Matt Couper as they are not my proposers, they were last year's. I have asked this to be corrected to Kevin Rye and Graham Stacey as stated on my nomination form. I'm looking forward to a challenging and tightly contested election.

I have asked that question DD and have been given no evidence of validity at this point. The secretary says they are working on it and the ESG Chair says that it’s not up to the ESG to prove validity. See my posts at 22:08 and 22:24 last night. (Keep a spare eye on the mention of a ticket.)

Shane B said "Think we could do a lot worse than the Meadow, OI and AIoW moderation dream team." Thanks for the vote of confidence- I think 🤔

Per Gazza, my view on this is that the DTB have had a year (almost) to bring forward a Rule 20 expulsion of Shane for approval. They didn't do so, and that would have been the way to block him, rather than this new retrospective election rule. I don't know all the ins and outs of Shane's interactions with the ESG and DTB but, based on the facts as presented, his treatment last year was harsh. His treatment this year (and the handling thereof) appears to be worse. But, again, I don't know all the facts.

OI, I get that. I'm on the light touch spectrum, but I do understand what libel is, so it's not a free hit by any measure. In any case, I would suggest that conversations will be had if we need to.

Shane: Have you asked the Secretary whether the DTB approved the election rules, per Rule 61 that you've quoted? It ought to be in the minutes, and I would have thought it would be in the redacted minutes too, but whether minuted or not, the rules for the election should have been approved by the DTB.

Trig - 'rule 10' being slipped in unconstitutionally to potentially 'aid' who the current board do and don't want standing can also be used to highlight serving board members past behaviour which would make their position, untenable...? I see little impartiality in the make up of the ESG and note the DTB sec involvement in the ESG too? 🧐. This the same bunch that effectively said they'd ignore a VONC? All of this is an appalling look 🤦‍♂️

Anyone here who understands the constitution better than me (many I suspect) Any advice on how to approach the fact that Election Rule 10 appears to have been created (and used) without following Constitution Rule 61?

Think we could do a lot worse than the Meadow, OI and AIoW moderation dream team.

I'll own up to being one of the new moderators, not sure about the "well respected" bit though. I'm starting by asking Meadow what she thinks about posts as a learning exercise, sorry Meadow. My general approach is along the lines of Daniel Patrick Moynihan's quote, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But not their own facts".

Thanks for all you've done Bert

Meadow has mentioned the WUP moderation members yesterday and I'd like to make it known that I have agreed to help keep Berts legacy alive. He deserves to have plenty of "me" time and recover from his medical journey and retire from WUP. Thank you Bert, for all you have done.

I'm not on here to drum up or beg for votes or support but will answer as honestly as I am allowed..

Morning all, feel free ask me any questions about my manifesto...but to be brutally honest I'm pretty disillusioned with whole thing at the moment

Thanks to Laurence, Timmy M and Leigh for being such good sports (and to so many candidates for standing). With eight candidates making the final cut, and LL topping his donation up to include the nine who put their hats in the ring, that’s a total of £57 raised for WAWF. 💛💙

When will the 50+1 be on the table again? Have a mind to vote agains't every recommendation the trusts makes in future.

Timmy - why would you assume the ultimatum to resign, if made, holds any weight?