[NSRCA-discussion] Proposals Survey
John Gayer
jgghome at comcast.net
Fri Feb 17 21:21:21 AKST 2012
Dan,
It's really not clear to me what your problem is. At least the
appearance is that you do not trust the BOD to provide you with honest
leadership. There are three members out of five on the rules committee
that are current members of the BOD. This is a hard-working committee
that has shown itself capable of compromise and turned these proposals
around very quickly. It is one thing for you to disagree vehemently with
the committee and another to accuse the members of lying, hidden agendas
and falsifying surveys. Apparently "volunteer" is also a dirty word but
the NSRCA would not function without them. If this is all true than I'm
wasting my time with this post as I must be part of the problem. Scott
has been an honest and open leader of the committee. He has the full
support of the committee and the board. Having a survey to obtain input
from the membership and the pattern community as a whole was Scott's
idea. The raw survey data is not modifiable by Scott. He can access it
for results and that is all. To suggest that he or anyone else on the
committee would falsify results is very insulting.
The rules committee is operating at the direction of the board. The
board members were presented with the four topics that have evolved as
rule change proposals. The board was presented with the original outline
in January that led to the formation of a committee and has also been
presented with the current versions of the proposals prior to the
survey. I'm sure many of the board members have also seen the vitriol
poured on the committee by a few online. All I have received from the
board at this point are words of encouragement.
This does not mean that all the proposals as presented by the committee
will get a rubber stamp of approval from the board. The committee
expects further modification or possible dismissal of proposals based
on the survey and opinions/amendments/votes of board members. No matter
whether the proposals are passed as is, modified or dropped, there will
be some unhappy folks on the board, the committee and the pattern
community as there are supporters and detractors for all the proposals.
I have always thought that all those great pattern folks I have met
around the country and the world are capable of civil discourse, amiable
disagreement and serious compromise when it comes to matters like these.
What I have seen online about these four proposals and the imputed
ethics of the committee members has shaken my faith. It has not,
however, shaken my desire to see this task through to the end.
John Gayer
NSRCA Treasurer
Rules Committee member
On 2/17/2012 8:52 PM, Dan Curtis wrote:
> Okay, that is it! I asked because I want to know, I have served on
> the board for several years prior and we were asked to prove darn near
> everything we did, including surveys. So if you want to attack with a
> C'mon Man so be it. From the views you expressed on RCU we know how
> you stand on the main issue of weight, from the minutes of the
> meetings for this year we know that you were able to select
> "volonteers" to complete your committee, we know that the preamble was
> written in a way to present the board as being for the proposed
> changes, so we know that some seem to have an agenda. You asked for
> it so you got it. So it would appear that we have no real verifiable
> way of supporting survey results one way or the other.
> I seldom post on this forum, since it usually just banter between old
> friends and foes and full of insider jokes but these so called
> proposals are things that should be discussed on this forum. They
> should have been discussed prior to being placed in any type of
> survey. They affect our sport and I believe your survey will show
> that they would effect it adversely. We have been through all of this
> before, over and over on weight. It seems like a resurecting ghost
> that we can't keep underground.
> The fact that you seem so defensive of your baby also adds to my doubt
> about this whole fiasco. Now, lay off the attacks and either answer
> the questions or ingnore them, your choice Mr. Chairman.
> Dan
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Scott McHarg <scmcharg at gmail.com>
> *To:* General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Sent:* Fri, February 17, 2012 9:34:22 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposals Survey
>
> Dan,
> It was actually 16 times you voted including your original. I've
> taken care of the extras for you. As far as factual, really? Do you
> honestly think that way? They will be factual because we are here to
> serve you. If the majority says they don't like something, what would
> be the purpose of doing it? If we wanted to push our own agendas, why
> even have a survey? C'mon Man!
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Dan Curtis <warrior523 at att.net
> <mailto:warrior523 at att.net>> wrote:
>
> Well, lets hope that is true, I only voted about 15 times so not a
> problem.
> One other question, how will we know the results are factual?
> Dan
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Scott McHarg <scmcharg at gmail.com <mailto:scmcharg at gmail.com>>
> *To:* General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>>
> *Sent:* Fri, February 17, 2012 9:25:53 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposals Survey
>
> Hi Dan,
> It just makes more work for me (which I'm sure Keith H. would
> enjoy greatly as he seems to have his panties in a wad). We have
> several filters in place so I'll just filter out the duplicate
> entries. We will know who is trying to "pad the results". There
> were several folks that were having trouble accessing the system
> so we had to remove the one time per user. Either way, only the
> initial entry will be taken and if a bunch go in just to screw it
> up for everyone, we'll just shut it down. You're right, it makes
> it a bit useless when people do that.
>
> Have a good weekend,
> Scott
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Dan Curtis <warrior523 at att.net
> <mailto:warrior523 at att.net>> wrote:
>
> Guys,
> When the survey was put up on the website I filled it out and
> submitted my answers. Then I could not get back in to the
> survey. Which I assume was to stop a person from voting more
> than once. Well, I was on the website earlier tonight and for
> the heck of it I hit the survey link and low and behold I was
> back in and was able to fill the survey out again. If I hit
> submit, I get the results sumitted message. It appears that a
> person can vote as many times as they see fit now. I had
> another person or two try the same thing with the same
> results. Is this feature okay or is it making the survey
> results a bit useless?
> It may still be only countng the first time you voted or
> submitted but that is not the way it appears. Anybody got an
> answer???
> Dan
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
>
> --
> *Scott A. McHarg*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
>
> --
> *Scott A. McHarg*
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20120218/ec063ca8/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list