Difference between revisions of "Talk:Board Policy on Alcohol"
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
--[[User:Davidfell|Davidfell]] ([[User talk:Davidfell|talk]]) 05:39, 27 April 2015 (CDT) | --[[User:Davidfell|Davidfell]] ([[User talk:Davidfell|talk]]) 05:39, 27 April 2015 (CDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I wasn't around when someone purchased the insurance policy for the space, but my guess is that the alcohol rider is a standard type of rider available for coverage and that the 2am-9am is a standard time block. After thinking this over for a while and bouncing ideas off of Carl, I think the board shouldn't have voted this as a policy and should have just informed the membership that they are not allowed to drink between 2am and 9am. As a board, we voted not to extend coverage because of how expensive it is to do so. The membership could bring up their own vote to extend coverage. Personally, I thought it was too damn expensive, so if a vote comes up, as a member, I'll vote no. --[[User:Skm|Skm]] ([[User talk:Skm|talk]]) 09:37, 27 April 2015 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 14:37, 27 April 2015
Can the board actually vote on this type of policy without a vote of the general membership? I would like clarification on that.
--Hef (talk) 00:52, 22 April 2015 (CDT)
I am curious how the insurance company determined that we can drink our asses off until 2am, but not after. As someone who keeps odd hours, I'd like to know this.
--Davidfell (talk) 05:39, 27 April 2015 (CDT)
I wasn't around when someone purchased the insurance policy for the space, but my guess is that the alcohol rider is a standard type of rider available for coverage and that the 2am-9am is a standard time block. After thinking this over for a while and bouncing ideas off of Carl, I think the board shouldn't have voted this as a policy and should have just informed the membership that they are not allowed to drink between 2am and 9am. As a board, we voted not to extend coverage because of how expensive it is to do so. The membership could bring up their own vote to extend coverage. Personally, I thought it was too damn expensive, so if a vote comes up, as a member, I'll vote no. --Skm (talk) 09:37, 27 April 2015 (CDT)