On November 8, 2004 11:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > stand' to be representative of the people at large. To allow the entire > group to decide on every decision that needs to be made to allow for the > club to run would result in not only a chaotic situation but it would take > enormous amounts of time to get anything done.
fortunately for all involved, this isn't the issue at hand. the issue at hand is the group being able to discuss this particular issue. not "decide": discuss. not "every issue": this issue. if people were trying to do what you suggested above, then you'd be on the right track. as it is, this is a Strawman. > discussion. However as time went on it appeared that although only a > handful of people had submitted their comments, discussions and planning > ensued on how to possibly make one particular plan a reality. yes, we were discussing it. but we were not "planning it" as that implies a finality, a decision having been made for all others, which had not even been contemplated. the Executive apparently got all excited about this because it failed to communicate with those of us involved in the discussion and therefore it came to a wrong conclusion about what was happening. but who cares, this should be water under the bridge. now, however, it seems you have problems with us _discussing_ things. perhaps you could explain to me what is undesirable with discussing how such a meeting might look like? should we all stand around silent, so the silent majority grows to 100%? > As has already been stated by my colleagues, this seemed premature. > Again we need > to ensure that the silent majority be involved in making decisions of this > nature and the Board did not feel that they had been heard from yet. so where, exactly, was the call for such conversation and communication from the Executive? the poling for these opinions? the statement of "hrm.. that's one possibility Jeff and Kevin, seems a lot of people are interested in it. but what else could there be? let's see if we can come up with at least one or two other concepts!" i ask this because i saw no such positive action. if your concern is hearing other viewpoints, the Executive should be plumbing for other viewpoints, not shut down conversation. > It > appeared that we had not heard from even 10 percent of our members. well, maybe the other 90% agreed. maybe they hated it. who knows? it was suggested that a poll be taken. i have yet to see the Executive reply to that very constructive suggestion, though i see them continuing to beat this dead horse and claim the sole perogative as decision makers. c'mon people, let's get on with it! if not, then i have better things to do with my time than engage in a heavy handed bureaucracy. -- Aaron J. Seigo Society is Geometric
pgpuc6oJEtuUv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
