At 03:46 AM 10/25/2012, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >On 24/10/2012 20:34, Doug Barton wrote: >... >> ... Nothing in the text suggests an >> unfettered right of creating new definitions of "vacant." > >You mean, new compared to the first definition in Merriam-Webster.com? > >1: not occupied by an incumbent, possessor, or officer <a vacant office> <vacant thrones> > >Objectively and factually, that seems to be the case. The objective facts of the case are that Marshall is non-responsive and has not attended some number of meetings and teleconferences. Period. To put a very specific point on this - in the real world, people get shot, or are other wise hurt and end up in coma's and are otherwise unable to fulfill the responsibilities of their office, and unless and until they resign from office or are removed by defined procedures, they remain the incumbent. I can list at least a few examples from American politics if you desire. In the academic world, a tenured named position does not become vacant when the incumbent goes on sabatical. If there are administrative responsibilities associated with the position, generally the organization has defined procedures to deal with the absence. >The IAOC is actually >going an extra mile rather than simply informing NomCom that the seat >has become vacant. > > Brian