Ellection process - use the bylaws it's easier

[Ken Thompson III]

Eric,

I am assuming you have your fire suit on:-)

It would have been nice to not have had to remind anyone in the current 
administration that there were new by-laws in effect.

Nothing personal, just a newbies observation.

Ken Thompson
NSRCA # 3646
D4 Sportsman, again
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Grow Pattern" <pattern4u at comcast.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 7:32 PM
Subject: Ellection process - use the bylaws it's easier


> Ed,
>
>       As the primary author of the new bylaws I am a bit saddened by how 
> things have worked out so far. The previous bylaws were not very 
> comprehensive and open to a lot of personal interpretation. The new ones 
> were written to make this a clear and easy to implement process.
>
>
>
>    The first change was to have a non-officer lead a committee that would 
> find candidates. This was to make it more comfortable for potential 
> candidates to apply, because it would be to someone who was not an 
> incumbent officer.
>
> To the best of my knowledge this did not quite happen. When reminded that 
> there were new bylaws that covered this process Mike Dorna was selected to 
> do the job.
>
>
>
>    I assumed that the reminder that there were new bylaws would have 
> prompted further checking of the rest of the new election bylaws. However, 
> it was later announced that our secretary would count the votes. The board 
> was again reminded that the bylaws specified a different action, namely 
> that an "outside" AMA count should be made. The word "should" was 
> subsequently challenged because if it said "shall" then it would have been 
> done correctly?
>
>
>
> My major point is that if the bylaws had been used in the first place, and 
> the spirit of the bylaws had  been adhered to, then we would not have lost 
> so much time, nor would we be where we are today. I am fully aware that we 
> can't change the past, but we can do a lot about changing the future.
>
>
>
> As a non-profit organization we need to follow our bylaws and avoid these 
> problems. As a society committed to developing our sport we need to follow 
> our bylaws to let new and existing members know that we are good 
> organization to be a part of.
>
>
>
> The last time I spoke out on my beliefs I got a few folks all riled up and 
> drew some fire. As a contributor on RCU I would like us to considering 
> adopting their standard of note writing. "Please resist the urge to curse, 
> flame, degrade, insult or embarrass someone in your post. We encourage the 
> free flow of your ideas, but believe that they can be communicated (and 
> received) much more effectively if you keep things civil. If you have to 
> vent, take it offline."
>      Regards,
>
>      Eric.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ARTICLE VIII  - ELECTIONS, SELECTIONS AND TERM OF OFFICE.
>
>
>
> Section 1 - Vacancies
> a. Candidates for office will be researched and proposed by a Chairperson 
> and/or committee selected by the President of the NSRCA. This Chairperson 
> or Committee will be comprised of a member or members of the NSRCA who are 
> not currently serving as elected or selected board members of the NSRCA.
>
>
>
>
>
> Section 2 - Executive Officers
>
> a. Executive officers shall hold office for two years from date of 
> installation, and until their successors are elected.
>
>
>
> b. Executive officers shall be elected in the fall of even numbered years.
>
>
>
> c. Ballots are to be mailed out to the voting eligible NSRCA membership, 
> wherever possible by the end of November of the election year.
>
>
>
> d. Closing date for ballot acceptance is DEC 31 for all election voting. 
> All votes must have a postal date no later than December 31 and be 
> received 10 calendar days thereafter.
>
>
>
> e. A third party to the NSRCA such as an external audit group of the AMA 
> should count all votes.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jim Ivey" <jivey61 at bellsouth.net>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 10:55 AM
> Subject: [SPAM] Re: FW: Ballots
>
>
>> Derek
>> As I said in my original e-mail ,it was sent, to you, for you, and was 
>> not sent to the discussion page for the earthlings to have more fodder to 
>> kick around.
>> For whatever reason you decided to make it public ,which is fine with me.
>> However, you negated my intentions of privacy by sending the responses to 
>> the discussion page .
>>> The comments were only for you, to see our perception of your actions.
>> If there is a phrase, unprofessional e-mail etiquite,this would apply.
>> So be it.
>>
>> Jim Ivey
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at earthlink.net>
>>> Date: 2004/12/19 Sun AM 01:07:33 EST
>>> To: "NSRCA List" <discussion at nsrca.org>
>>> Subject: FW: Ballots
>>>
>>>  And just so everyone can see my response as well...
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Derek Koopowitz [mailto:derekkoopowitz at earthlink.net]
>>> Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:05 PM
>>> To: 'Jim Ivey'
>>> Subject: RE: Ballots
>>>
>>> Jim,
>>>
>>> As an elected executive officer of the NSRCA - yes, I am still in 
>>> office - I
>>> can still make comments about how I want to see things done, or see 
>>> things
>>> done the right way.  That is my right.  I do not intend to control 
>>> anything
>>> or anyone - that isn't my style.  If I want to solicit input for the
>>> K-Factor why can't I?  As the ex-editor (a week removed) I think I have 
>>> that
>>> right to, don't you think?  I'd be doing it regardless of whether I was
>>> running for President.
>>>
>>> As for the ballots?  Well, I guess we'll be damned if we don't do 
>>> anything
>>> and we'll be damned if we do.  Who wins?  I don't.  You don't.  The 
>>> person
>>> that didn't vote, didn't.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Jim Ivey [mailto:jivey61 at bellsouth.net]
>>> Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:57 PM
>>> To: derekkoopowitz at earthlink.net
>>> Subject: Ballots
>>>
>>>  Derek
>>> I am keeping these comments direct to you and not on the discussion 
>>> page.
>>> The comments about generating  extra ballots is not legal.  Maureen, 
>>> can't
>>> do it legally and since a private group is handling the election They 
>>> won't
>>> do it either.
>>> The peoples concerns should be directed to Tony Stillman, who is still
>>> President, not you.
>>> Derek from my view point it appears that you are already  trying to 
>>> control
>>> the K-factors contents and change the balloting system. A candidate for
>>> office should put his platform on the table to let the people see who to
>>> vote for. When the elections are over the person that is elected can 
>>> have
>>> all the control and power they want to have.
>>> Look at this from my side of the fence and I think you can understand 
>>> what I
>>> am saying.
>>> I'm not the only one that has seen it this way.
>>>
>>> Jim Ivey
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> =================================================
>>> To access the email archives for this list, go to
>>> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>>> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>>> and follow the instructions.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> =================================================
>> To access the email archives for this list, go to
>> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> and follow the instructions.
>>
>
> =================================================
> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
> 

=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.