Possible proposal for guidelines around how often and when a major piece can be revised:
To prevent constant revisiting and rehashing certain literature, the wording of a major piece of our fellowship's literature such as the steps, traditions, concepts, or mission statement will:
- Only be put on the agenda for consideration if it has been at least 5 years since the last revision
- Require a motion supported by at least 10 members or 2 groups to add such an agenda item
- Require a reasonable explanation of problems caused by the current wording
GSC decides whether or not to move forward with process, and if so the GSC or a GSC subcommittee must:
- Involve all groups and as many members as possible
- Poll as many members as possible about potential changes, being very clear and careful to ask Do you believe that the current wording is causing problems? and If so, what wording do you believe will best meet the needs of all members and newcomers? and NOT "What's your personal preference?"
- Ask if there are any other problems being caused by the focus piece so that all such issues can be resolved with this process, which is very time-consuming and won't be repeated for at least another five years.
- Run all resulting proposals by all groups
- Only pass proposals that have the support of at least 3/4 of groups