|
Grex > Coop8 > #114: Agenda for September, 1996 Board meeting (7:30 pm at ITI) | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 84 responses total. |
scg
|
|
response 25 of 84:
| 
Sep 27 05:16 UTC 1996 |
re 23:
We most certainly did not "agree that this is something for the members
of Grex to decide," in the context that Valerie apparrently means it. As I
stated then, I feel very strongly that the board was elected to make decisions
so that them members don't have to deal with every little issue that comes
up. In this case, we had a sizable fraction of the board that was afraid to
offend selena, and therefore refused to deal with the issue. I don't feel
the board was doing its job in this case.
|
scott
|
|
response 26 of 84:
|
Sep 27 11:05 UTC 1996 |
Well, although I didn't say it such terms, I'n *not* afraid of offending
Selena, I just consider this to be something better decided directly by the
members.
1. There isn't any big time issue, which is what the Board is useful for.
2. The may not want to abdicate *all* responsibility to the Board
3. A vote of the members will be a lot more convincing than a "inner-circle
conspiracy" decision by the board.
|
robh
|
|
response 27 of 84:
|
Sep 27 13:03 UTC 1996 |
I'd agree more with scott's third point. If the Board had said,
"Let's just vote now, and piss selena off", this would not have ended.
We would have seen more items, and MANY more responses, in this
conference, wasting the time of the Board and the membership.
This way, we can get it resolved once and for all, and then get
on with other business.
I don't think the Board failed to do its job here, and I *certainly*
didn't do this out of fear. But I *am* annoyed that scg thinks that.
|
davel
|
|
response 28 of 84:
|
Sep 27 14:05 UTC 1996 |
I'd say it's quite appropriate for the board to hand something like this one
over to the members. It's a policy question with pretty wide implications
on a couple of fronts, & it's not a decision that needs to be made this
instant, & it's one on which there's been very vocal disagreement. I'd hate
to say that questions about how much particular conferences should be
autonomous regarding systemwide interface is some picky little issue, Steve.
(I also wouldn't complain if the board had gone ahead & decided it. Their
call, given that it's not an inappropriate matter for membership vote.)
|
kerouac
|
|
response 29 of 84:
|
Sep 27 15:53 UTC 1996 |
A vote is a good idea. If there isgoing tobe one, the issue of
"Should grex offer POP e-mail when Backtalk is installed?"
should be voted on as well, because it is also a similar backtalk issue.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 30 of 84:
|
Sep 27 15:55 UTC 1996 |
Oops, Re 25: I noticed that when I re-read what I had said. What I meant is
that we agreed that the members run Grex, so the members ultimately decide
all issues. Where we differed at the meeting is that some board members felt
the board should decide, so users don't need to decide on every single issue,
while other board members felt that there are people who feel sufficiently
strongly about this issue that the users should decide directly.
I agree with what scott/robh/davel said. And I resent being called "afraid
of selena". I do think she won't rest if the board makes a decision on this
issue, but maybe if the users decide she will be satisfied. This is not fear.
It's a desire to make Grex's users, including Selena and all the members, as
happy as possible with the decisions Grex makes.
Also, it's been a really long time since Grex had a member vote on anything.
One of the big features of membership is that you can change the way the
system runs by putting *anything* up for a vote. This feature isn't exercised
a lot, and that's *good*, but I also think it's useful for members to
sometimes be reminded that this is their system and they can vote to change
it around to suit themselves.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 31 of 84:
|
Sep 27 15:56 UTC 1996 |
Kerouac slipped in. Richard, if you'd like that to be voted on, you're
welcome to become a member and put it up for a vote.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 32 of 84:
|
Sep 27 16:11 UTC 1996 |
popcorn, just request that their bea members vote on "backtalk
issues", as necessary before it is operational. Whether to use
pop email accounts or find some other way to deal with the
email issue as it relates to backtalk, is as imporrtant as
anonmous reads and fw protocol in a backtalk world. It would be
silly to have a vote on one issue later, when its sensible and
relevant to simply vote on all three now.
|
robh
|
|
response 33 of 84:
|
Sep 27 18:52 UTC 1996 |
I'd rather not see the issues mized up like that. Believe it or
not, we can run two different votes on two completely different
proposals if we need to.
|
dang
|
|
response 34 of 84:
|
Sep 27 20:00 UTC 1996 |
Besides, popcorn decided she wanted a vote on the fw deciding that a cf should
be left out of backtalk issue, not the pop issue. I personally don't think
the pop issue needs a vote, maybe popcorn thinks the same.
|
pfv
|
|
response 35 of 84:
|
Sep 28 09:44 UTC 1996 |
Just my (non-member) two cents, folks...
Mnut/Arbornuts & the Borg are all having some major problems
with a lack of ability to keep & maintain Voting members. They
also tend to micro-manage Mnut.
OTOH, they don't *LIKE* to let the members vote, so perhaps that
has the effect of causing members to leave for greener pastures..
"Vote Early & Often" is basically applicable to things like
the Grex-universe, folks.. Keep the voters (paid members) happy.
OTOH, there is a point where the decisions *MUST* be
Board-decided.. Like when the money is insufficient for some new
gismo.. I would certainly agree that POP might well bog down
Grex even worse than normal operations. - Unless you plan to
upgrade (somehow) or can afford it, it sure sounds like you should
make the decision for the good of all your users.
Anyway, Carry on & over - sorry to bug you.
(BTW: the "Conf-debate" is going hot&heavy in general@mnut)
|
ajax
|
|
response 36 of 84:
|
Sep 28 15:13 UTC 1996 |
I don't think M-Net allows for member referenda in its
bylaws; board elections are the only votes they allow.
One thing I think is good in a member vote is an indication
that there's at least one member on each side of the issue.
I haven't followed the discussion carefully; did any members
express support for non-Backtalk-accessible conferences?
|
kerouac
|
|
response 37 of 84:
|
Sep 28 18:32 UTC 1996 |
I think the board is showing great reluctance to make itself heard
on anything that isnta financial matter. Its vote "not toobject"
on the issue of .yes/.no writes was a total wimp out. The same thing
happened here. If the board thinks it should only make ruling
decisions on dollars and cents issues, it should say that. Maybe
a separate committee is needed or something. I think a vote is
alright, but realy not necessary. Selena and Brighn may be the only
ones who feel strongly about their position. If the board vote was
goingto be unanimous, or nearly so, that indicates that there is
reason to believe the issue itself is not divisive and that a member
wide vote wouldnt change anything.
So we're having a vote on those questions. But ironically, the Pop
mail issue is moredivisive, and I get theimpression that the board
would be reluctant to have a member vote on that because there are more
people who are simply going to think "well POP would be nice to have"
rather than who would consider theimplications of it.
This is why you hear people saying theboard is wimpy. They'll
defer to a member vote on something they know the members wont
disagree with them. But if there's a chance the member vote and
the board vote would be different, then they dont want the vote.
I think the bylaws should be changed. I think no memberwide vote should
be held on anything until theboard has voted on that issue, and is on
record. No member should be asked to vote on any important issue until
they know exactly where each and every board member stands on it. Members
have the right to know the Board's positions.
A member vote should never beheld in lieu of a board vote, but only if
there is a desire to countermand board action.
|
ajax
|
|
response 38 of 84:
|
Sep 28 19:40 UTC 1996 |
The board doesn't choose what members get to vote on, *members*
choose what to vote on. If a *single* member thinks we should vote
on offering POP mail service, speak up and initiate a vote!
I read through item 111, and it didn't look like a single member
supports POP mail without some heavy restrictions, except possibly
AdBarr, under the assumption that money, bandwidth, and hardware
issues can be resolved. The issue's "divisiveness" so far seems
mainly between one person and everyone else.
|
scott
|
|
response 39 of 84:
|
Sep 28 21:14 UTC 1996 |
<Argggghhh...>
Kerouac, letting members vote on *anything* is the member's defense against
a bad Board. If we didn't have that, members couldn't have recalls, and the
Board could run rampant.
The Board is a necessary evil, trading full representation for fast action.
The Board is needed to handle money matters, moving, etc., and not necessarily
system policy. As a member, I'd much prefer topics like this to be a member
vote rather than hoping the Board would vote the way I wanted.
|
janc
|
|
response 40 of 84:
|
Sep 28 22:57 UTC 1996 |
Right. The board "wimped out" on this because Valerie, speaking as a member,
not as a board member, said she was going to take it to a member vote. Any
member can do that. Since a member was going to do that, there was no reason
for the board to continue to worry about it. So they "wimped out."
|
chelsea
|
|
response 41 of 84:
|
Sep 29 01:17 UTC 1996 |
I think Valerie handled it well.
|
ladyevil
|
|
response 42 of 84:
|
Sep 29 03:13 UTC 1996 |
And i thank her for it.
Ker- glad I don't log onto anywhere YOU are in charge of.
|
arthurp
|
|
response 43 of 84:
|
Sep 29 06:51 UTC 1996 |
I think we should set up a system of district representation for the members
to act in a legislative manner, and the board can then act as a judicial
branch for members to bring motions before. The staff would then be an
executive branch. The staff would have to divide into administrations for
hardware, houseing, software, administration of users, administration of
access, maybe planning, too. We could set up a system where the board is
appointed by the staff, and the staff and the new legislative bodies are
elected by the members through a system involving the board acting as an
electoral college to follow the popular vote.
Grex is certain to die out if we don't ammend the bylaws to offer a reasonably
structured environment for conferencing to exist under.
Oh, and I was just getting ready to start a member vote on this issue of
backtalk as well, but I had to look into how first, and well, tick tick
tick...
|
chelsea
|
|
response 44 of 84:
|
Sep 29 12:04 UTC 1996 |
Dang, it's a pity M-net is gasping. You would have loved
they way they did things.
|
ajax
|
|
response 45 of 84:
|
Sep 29 14:26 UTC 1996 |
Are portions of #43 intended to be sarcasm, or is it a sincere suggestion?
|
janc
|
|
response 46 of 84:
|
Sep 29 17:45 UTC 1996 |
That would be sarcasm. Geez.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 47 of 84:
|
Sep 29 17:55 UTC 1996 |
Re 37: Kerouac, you are the ONLY person I've ever heard say that Grex's board
is wimpy. Besides, if the board ran rampant making lots of decisions without
user input, what would you say then? Frankly, I'm *glad* that the board
listens to user input.
|
ladyevil
|
|
response 48 of 84:
|
Sep 30 01:55 UTC 1996 |
Trust me, from experience, these people are no wimps.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 49 of 84:
|
Sep 30 14:49 UTC 1996 |
All I'm sayign is that there are plenty of issues (POP email for instance)
that it would be potentially dangerous for the members to vote on without
knowing where the board stands. It doesnt hurt anything to say that
the bylaws be changed as such:
"Any member can request a vote on any issue, but no vote shall take
place until the Board has voted onthis issue itself. The membership
vote, if it takes place, will supercede theboard vote"
This isnt silly...most states wont letyou put referendums on theballot
unless the legislature has considered the issues in question.
And Popcorn, SCG calledthe board wimpy in #1 I believe, because he
thought there should have been a vote. So i'm the second
person to make that claim.
|