Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 45

Thread: Proposed ArkGeo Bylaws

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    White Hall
    Posts
    36
    I understand the perspective that someone may be too nitpicky. And that everyone believes that in a gray area we would all do the right thing. But, if that were the case, then there really wouldn't be a need for bylaws. You need to develop things like bylaws to address contingencies that everyone hopes will never happen.

    Ar kayaker has a valid point. And I am okay with it being addressed by amendment after the fact rather than making a change and starting the voting over. But long dogs is already suggesting that would be done in a way that is contrary to what the proposed bylaws say. He says the general membership can vote on an amendment to create a formal way for members to resign. That's not accurate. The board has the only authority to change bylaws. Now that I think about it, it really would be better for the general membership to ratify any changes to the bylaws proposed by the board. But that is not how it is written.

  2. #32
    Guest
    Actually JacksonB's solution sounds like a real winner. Give the general membership ratification power before any changes to the bylaws go into effect. Combine that with the removal of the statement "In the future, dues may be established as deemed appropriate and voted on by the Board of Directors." and you have the needed safety net. If dues are needed later the bylaws could be amended to allow for them, but it would take the membership ratification to put it into effect.

    In the meantime, I for one am not satisfied with "we promise we might change it later if everyone jumps on us to do it and we feel like it." Especially since that comes from only one SC member who says they aren't speaking for the SC.

    LongDogs says take it or leave it, so I say leave it. Vote it down so we can start over and get it right.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Cachin' America's Heartland
    Posts
    449
    Ar a yakker sez:
    LongDogs says take it or leave it, so I say leave it. Vote it down so we can start over and get it right.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Our fledgling group needs the leadership of of calm thoughtful people that we are familiar with.
    Do not be led astray by someone with a warped agenda. This person has made many posts on our forums, read them and see if this is the person you want telling you how to vote.
    Go to the top of the page and click on search. Type in the name of any member that has ever posted here. Their own words will tell you all that you need to know about whether you should be following their advice.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    White Hall
    Posts
    36
    I don't know ar_kayaker, mountainborn, long dogs, anyone else on the steering committee or hardly anyone else that participates on this website. I have met a few of you one time at a meet & greet. So for me, there is nothing personal in this.

    All I know is I can read a set of proposed bylaws and decide for myself if they are good or bad. In this case, I think they are overall sufficient with some deficiencies that need to be corrected. If most members want to vote down the whole thing, make changes and vote on a new set, I'm okay with that. If we want to go ahead and approve with a concensus that corrections will be made in the near future, I'm okay with that. I have no reason to distrust anyone here that there are less than noble intentions all around. Part of the reason I'm comfortable with that is that this is an organization designed to promote a hobby, not a new state government. National security is not contigent on the outcome of this vote.

    As a reminder, the U.S. Constitution was ratified and quickly amended 10 times to correct what the founding fathers saw immediately as deficiencies. I'm confident we can work through this.

    I would like to hear from other members, in particular, other steering committee members, on their thoughts about the issues ar_kayaker has raised and I have commented on. Not the personalities, but the issues.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    396
    Happy New Year!

    I am proud to be in a country and and part of an organization where I can speak freely!

    Reading the proposed bylaws does take some time and careful reflection. It does require some effort and I hope each one reading this will put forth that effort. I also hope that if something doesn't feel right, that you will take the time to comment on it and then vote the proposed bylaws up or down. To my knowledge there is no emergency to get something approved. Voting down the proposed bylaws is not a bad thing. It is part of a wonderful process.

    ar_kayaker is not bashful about stating his opinion. He raises some valid points as jacksonb points out. If voting up or down is the only option at this point, I will probably vote down but I don't see why we can't debate the existing proposal and make modifications before a final vote is cast to get the bylaws "refined" before asking for a membership vote.

    I would like to see the steering committe take a more "lets ask the membership first" approach rather than the "let's see how the membership reacts" approach that seems to be the prevaling thought.

  6. #36
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by tech_guy
    I would like to see the steering committe take a more "lets ask the membership first" approach rather than the "let's see how the membership reacts" approach that seems to be the prevaling thought.
    Actually I don't think they have a "let's see how they react" attitude I think it's more of not even thinking that there might be a reaction. That's why I think there is so much surprise and angst when somebody disagrees with their pronouncements.

    The SC members meet in a closed forum and discus things among themselves and if issues are raised they are resolved without anyone else ever seeing any of it. Then when stuff is finally released to the membership they assume things are resolved because they resolved them among themselves already.

    The problems arise when someone either sees things from a new perspective that wasn't available behind closed doors or can't follow what happened behind closed doors and can't understand the decision reached.

    A more open door policy would go a long way to making things better. Maybe making the SC forum visible, but not allowing posts from non SC/Board members. Then if a member saw a problem they could Pm a SC member and head it off before it became "law."

    David

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Fort Smith, AR
    Posts
    846
    Ar_kayaker there is not enough of a meeting place and we could never get everyone together and the right time for something like that. Its hard enough getting the 5 of us together.
    If your not living life on the edge your taking up too much space!!!!!!


  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hot Springs Village
    Posts
    621
    $100 monthly dues, no placement of caches without board approval, sure you'll trust the next person or the person after that.[/quote]



    Don't send the check if you don't want to pay the dues if they are ever enacted. Man that's simple.


    ARKGEO cannot dictate who can and cannot place caches. Geocaching .com hosts the cache pages and ARKGEO has no say.

    These points are not valid.

    If you don't like the bylaws then vote against them, if you do like them then vote for them. The process it started either way. Stick around and see what happens or get mad like BackpackinJack and go start your own website.

    This is beyond ridiculous.

  9. #39
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by arkansas_stickerdude
    Ar_kayaker there is not enough of a meeting place and we could never get everyone together and the right time for something like that. Its hard enough getting the 5 of us together.
    There isn't enough meeting space for the general membership to read the SC forum? Who said anything about a physical meeting? Hello, get with the information age. Notice this message board we are all on? Ever hear of minutes of the meeting? Sunshine Laws?

    You sound like the mayor when I talked to him one day. I raised some concern about getting information out to the public and he said everyone should show up at the city council meetings if they wanted to have input, as if he expected all 30,000 people in town to try and fit in the meeting hall.

    ACC Board meetings are open to all 1000+ members and are held in a physical location, so there is no real reason this club can't do the same with less than 500 user names logged into the message board with probably far less than half that being real people.

    David Mc

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Fort Smith, Arkansas
    Posts
    3
    If you don't like it, don't participate. It's that simple. Why has this become a 3 page thread?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •