Originally Posted by
Wuzatforus
So, those who screamed that it was wrong to recall in 2015, now say it's ok because?? Their morals changed since then? Two wrongs make a right? Or, they were just pretending to have morals?
Pick one. I'm pretty sure those are the only options.
If they justify one, but not the other, then they're being weasels.
Do you know anyone who tries to justify the recalls in 2015, but not these?
My personal opinion is both are wrong if they are based solely upon votes for/against a TA or a chairman. There needs to be some failure of representation to trigger a recall.