Chaps, I think some are missing the wood because of the trees. They way I see things tomorrow's discussion isn't about solo/sole etc, it is about process and whether the 2016 motion and associated vote was valid. It wouldn't wholly surprise me if, in the cold light of day, the LAA finds that it didn't follow an appropriate course of action.
So, assuming that is the case and therefore the award is reinstated, where does that leave everyone? Firstly, I suspect a few honourable people may feel that they will have to fall on their swords, some of the less honourable should do the same but probably will not. I think the LAA will also wise-up and decide it wants to avoid any similar confrontation in the future. Finally, and I truly believe this, I hope that the LAA will identify an individual or two and politely rescind their membership of the Association in accordance with para 9a of the Association's Rules:
9 MEMBERS’ CONDUCT PREJUDICIAL TO THE LAA
9a Individual Membership
In the event of any member being charged with conduct which the Board may consider prejudicial to the LAA, the member may be called before the Board and failing an explanation satisfactory to the Board, may be cautioned, suspended, required to resign, or be expelled as the Board, in their absolute discretion, may determine. The member has the right to appeal the decision, and should do so to the LAA President or Vice President, in writing, setting out their reasons for appeal, within one month. The President or Vice President will advise the LAA Board of their findings and the LAA Board may reconsider its decision.