Fw: Ellection process - use the bylaws it's easier

Sun Dec 19 19:53:21 AKST 2004

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Grow Pattern" <pattern4u at comcast.net>
To: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: Ellection process - use the bylaws it's easier

> Derek,
>             I have been looking at this problem and wanted to make a 
> suggestion.
>
> 1. The official vote counters need to have a list from our database of 
> current vote eligible members.
>
> 2. Their NSRCA number, OR AMA number , OR  Name & address from the ballot 
> is acceptable as an identifier.
>
> 3. Once that name is Check-marked on the voters' list, any more ballots 
> from the same member can be discarded.
>
> That way you don't have to worry about any duplicate ballots.
>
> To make your action legal;
>
> 1.  Simply propose sending out replacement ballots to e-mail or written 
> requests. Include the above process for ballot verification.
>
> 2. Get it seconded.
>
> 3. Tony can  then ask for a full board vote.
>
> That will make it legal, even if it was or was not already.
>
> Hope this helps?
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at earthlink.net>
> To: <pattern4u at comcast.net>
> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 8:23 PM
> Subject: RE: Ellection process - use the bylaws it's easier
>
>
>> Eric,
>>
>> As the primary author of the bylaws is there anything in there that says 
>> we
>> can not mail out new ballots to those that did not receive theirs?  Just
>> curious because I can't see anything that precludes us from doing that...
>> The only thing I'm aware of is that the ballots need to be mailed back by
>> 12/31.  If you read Jim Ivey's note to me at the bottom you'll see that 
>> he
>> says what I am doing is illegal - I disagree.  I'm not proposing changing
>> anything about the voting process just the fact that we'd like to get
>> ballots in the hands of those that didn't get them.
>>
>> -Derek
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] 
>> On
>> Behalf Of Grow Pattern
>> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 4:33 PM
>> To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> 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.