I believe the reason it may be 5 of 6 being charged is because that one was dissenting to what the majority wanted to do...I have been in a board situation where I was often the one dissenting member to doing things that I considered professionally unethical and finally had to step down because I didn't want to be liable for decisions **consistently **made that I found unethical. I kept needing to be the 'brakes" but the "car' still went where the majority drivers wanted it to go.
Maybe that 6th person should have done so long ago, too.
Not sure what your comment about it not being "up to one member to decide their fate" means. This isn't about any of their members deciding their fate. It is about legal charges being brought against those 5 for what they did do.
Is it important to clear this up, or just assume miscommunication/misunderstanding?**
I believe the reason it may be 5 of 6 being charged is because that one was dissenting to what the majority wanted to do...I have been in a board situation where I was often the one dissenting member to doing things that I considered professionally unethical and finally had to step down because I didn't want to be liable for decisions **consistently **made that I found unethical. I kept needing to be the 'brakes" but the "car' still went where the majority drivers wanted it to go.
Maybe that 6th person should have done so long ago, too.
Not sure what your comment about it not being "up to one member to decide their fate" means. This isn't about any of their members deciding their fate. It is about legal charges being brought against those 5 for what they did do.
Is it important to clear this up, or just assume miscommunication/misunderstanding?**