response 51 of 75:

Feb 13 16:30 UTC 1999

   Rane, why is is that *our* particluar brand of rules offends you
so?  I'm really curious about this.  It isn't the case that we
abandon our clothes and rules during board meetings, is it?  Do
we resemble the ancestors of homo sapiens sapiens when we meet for
a board meeting?
   Why is it that we can't use the system we've developed over time?
How would our lives (or Grex's) have been improved?

response 53 of 75:

Feb 13 19:30 UTC 1999

I went looking for Welty on the web bookstores, and could not find it.

Re #51: you don't have any "particular brand of rules". You make them
up as you go along. It is true that some degree of consistency has
arisen because the same people keep serving on the board, but this is
not a healthy long-term basis for procedures. 

response 55 of 75:

Feb 13 20:26 UTC 1999

IF you want to see Welty, check it out of the public library.  It is not a
mass-market paperback, and is distributed by a small publishing company.  

response 57 of 75:

Feb 14 15:06 UTC 1999

No, it's from a co-op press.

response 59 of 75:

Feb 14 22:55 UTC 1999

Caroline House.  The book is available from University of Wisconsin Center
for Cooperatives.

response 61 of 75:

Feb 15 12:32 UTC 1999

   Hmmm.  I'm not at all sure that Grex's style of business meetings
aren't what most people are more familiar with, Rane.  I think the
case could be made that Grex's model relies far more on common sense
and a lack of political stance making than the traditional RRO.
Certainly RRO is far more complex. ...And probably the right thing
for a large contentious organization which needs a very specific
way to be able to accomplish things, when the factions in the org
aren't likely to help the process along.

   In all the time I've been to board meetings (probably most of
them, like 70%) I have never heard a single person berate Grex for
its style of management during board meetings.  Not afterwards,
not in the conferences nor via email.  I have heard comments that
our style was unusual, but when queried no one has ever told me
they thought it was wrong--indeed, several said they thought it was
refreshing that we din't wallow in a rule structure and yet still
got things done.

   Except of course, for you Rane. ;-)  Perhaps others will step
up to the pro-RRO plate, but that *I* know of, you are the sole
proponent of this.

   But rather than argue over the merits of the different ways
of doing things, let me ask you this: Do you think the various
Grex boards would have done a better job of governance had they
used RRO?  Specific examples would be excellent.

response 63 of 75:

Feb 15 17:23 UTC 1999

Steve asks a question: my answer is that various Grex board would have
wasted less time if they had followed parliamentary rules. It has been
a long time since I attended a Grex board meeting, but I do recall
(rather unspecifically) a couple of times that I resolved a question
that arose by making a suggestion (that came from RRoO, though I did
not say so). I also recall that the Grex board at that time was rather
confused about logical procedures of amendment of motions (i.e.,
exactly where they were in handling amendments up to the third degree),
which I have no problem with. There were no "parliamentary crises"
however - since so little is at stake. Actions were limited more by lack
of resources than lack of procedures. 

response 65 of 75:

Feb 15 17:50 UTC 1999

No. The board already acts on some general notions from RRoO. For example,
motions passing my a majority vote, or even making motions, discussing
them, and voting (in that order :)). If they knew a little more, there
would be a little more order and simplicity. It just builds. (If you
followed consensus rules, you would never even vote, but wait until you
had unanimity (because the minority finally wanted to go home...)).

response 67 of 75:

Feb 15 22:42 UTC 1999

   No.  The board has never expressed interest in RRO, but neither
has it been interested in simple chaos.  It isn't that we dislike
rules--far from it, since technical people live by rules (protocols,
instruction sets, etc)--but that in the course of our interactions
we haven't seen the need to increase the rules beyond a simple level.

   It only now occurs to me that Grex's operation adopts the KISS
principal: Kiss It Simple Stupid.  A simple yet often overlooked
philosophical statement which programmers use (and elsewhere?), 
which seems to apply to Grex's way of conduction business.  Yes,
we use the beginning parts of RRO.  That layer of the protocol has
served us well.

response 69 of 75:

Feb 16 05:32 UTC 1999

Actually, I've enjoyed STeve's pleasant arguing style in this case, and
I think we have both been rather moderate in the discussion. He, of course,
is a (very) oldtimer in Grex, and likes keeping doing things the way he
always has. I'm a relative newcomer and outsider, with much experience
in non-profit management. We just have different perspectives on the
fundamental necessities of how best to organize the management of a
non-profit corporation. 

That's KEEP it Simple Stupid. However, it isn't simple when the rules
are just in people's heads and cannot be discovered anywhere in order
to know how to function - except by doing what the traditional board
members do. I find that a rather suppressive atmosphere.

response 71 of 75:

Feb 19 23:04 UTC 1999

        Why are there only 3 voices in this weeks responses to this 
item?

response 73 of 75:

Mar 15 18:09 UTC 1999

Yup it was yet another RRoo debate, and I have heard it all before, so I 
didn't even bother to read it.