I agree with what you and Dave are saying. I took a look at our
membership page to see what the difference was for the varied types of
memberships. So I figured if we added a corporate membership type maybe
there should be something different in the benefits. Otherwise then why
have the different distinction. My mention of voting was just a sticky
note on the wall of ideas in a brainstorm session. (Good idea, Bad
Idea, food for thought?) I guess my words could be classified as bad
idea from what I have heard. So if we were in a room right now I'd be
walking to the front and removing my sticky.
I do understand that we give a membership with attendance to PICC. It
is a benefit for attending the conference and I understand it has voting
rights as all memberships to LOPSA has. This is a discussion and right
or wrong you throw out ideas to stir up some discussion. I guess it is
just the problem with an email discussion.
I just feel that if you have different types of memberships (Charter,
Founder, Individual, Student,complimentary and Honorary) there should be
some type of distinction. There is some distinction of these types on
the membership page so it would follow suit that some distinction would
be given to a corporate membership. That distinction still has to be
vetted out
(I changed the title of this as it has more to do with membership
drives then SySadmin day activities)
John J. Boris Sr.
JEN-A-SyS Administrator Archdiocese of Philadelphia
Chairman Professional IT Community Conference (PICC'12)
www.picconf.org
Evan Pettrey <jepett...@gmail.com> 4/9/2012 2:52 PM >>>
John,
Membership to LOPSA comes in a variety of ways and I don't agree with
your
assessment that some channels of becoming a member are worth more or
less
than others. To further validate this point, consider some of the ways
people currently become members of LOPSA:
- Members who sign themselves up and pay the $50 out of their own
pocket
(these are the people you feel should be full-fledged members)
- Members who seek out membership through their employer, who pays
for
their annual membership dues.
- Members who obtain membership by attending one of the conferences
sponsored by LOPSA
As the chair of PICC I'm sure you are well aware that one of the
largest
(if not the largest?) sources of new members for LOPSA recently has
been
through paid attendance at a LOPSA sponsored conference. Would you
suggest
that people who obtain their membership through these conferences be
given
a full membership that includes voting rights? I, myself, have kept my
membership active the last two years by attending PICC (furthered by
the
fact that my employer paid for my attendance). Under your set of
conditions, should I be given voting rights for the board of
directors?
It is my opinion that membership to LOPSA should be fair and equal
across
the board, no matter how the person obtained their membership. LOPSA
needs
to ensure their membership is inclusive of anybody that wishes to be
more
involved in the sys admin community, no matter how they became a member
of
LOPSA. This is whats best for LOPSA as well as the sys admin community.
If
somebody in our industry wants to be active within LOPSA, I see no
reason
to exclude them based upon the fact that their employer or colleague
paid
for their membership dues.
Just my 2 cents...
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 1:51 PM, John BORIS <jbo...@adphila.org> wrote:
What I meant by that was a person who pays for their membership as
opposed to one who is given it might have a bit more interest in the
organization. A stake holder so to speak. Just a thought. We have
different types of membership now in place with varying levels of
benefits. Again just brainstorming what a Corporate membership would
be.
John J. Boris, Sr.
<da...@lang.hm> 4/9/2012 1:46 PM >>>
On Mon, 9 Apr 2012, John BORIS wrote:
The talk about Corporate memberships is fine with me but we would
have
to setup a structure for that. A dues paying member gets voting
rights
and can run for a spot on the board. There should be some
distinction
on
that.
Why should it matter if the member is paying the dues out of their
own
pocket (with or without reimbursement from their employer), or if
their
employer is paying the dues directly?
Yes, companies could try to game the system by paying employee
memebership
dues and trying to get those employees to all vote one way, but does
banning corporate memberships really prevent this? Is it worth the
hassles
of creating, maintaining, and explaining a second-class membership
for
the
slight speed bump that this would put in the way of any company that
was
inclined to do this sort of thing?
David Lang
______________________________**_________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.lopsa.org
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-**bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss<https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
This list provided by the League of Professional System
Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
______________________________**_________________
