Matt, What you are doing is just fine. This is a Public list and you are getting responses from both LOPSA and Non Lopsa people but you are getting a consensus of opinion. I don't think we would be doing our organization any type of Justice of writing a policy and not have a lawyer review it.
John J. Boris, Sr. "Remember! That light at the end of the tunnel Just might be the headlight of an oncoming train!" >>> Matt Simmons <[email protected]> 5/25/2012 3:05 PM >>> OK, I completely agree that an attorney needs to be involved. Also, consulting an attorney is exactly what every guide to writing harassment policies for 501c3's that I've read suggests. But, every guide that I've read also suggests that the document should be originally drafted by the organization, which allows it to set the tone and goals. The attorney then can see what our intent is, and change, add, and remove phrases that we don't have the expertise to apply. The reason that I wanted to do this in the public list is exactly what's happening. To get feedback from everyone. Find out what's important to people. Because an attorney should absolutely be consulted, but just as we aren't experts in the bar association, they aren't experts in LOPSA. Is that fair? --Matt On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:59 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > In the message dated: Fri, 25 May 2012 13:42:29 EDT, > The pithy ruminations from Matt Simmons on > <Re: [lopsa-discuss] Establish a definitive LOPSA Harassment and > Discrimination > Policy> were: > => --20cf307abcdd729f2604c0dfe460 > => Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > => > => As have I. My first thought is that we should have a lawyer involved. > That's > => > also my 2nd through 10th thought on the subject. > => > > => > For thoughts 11-to-N, see below. > => > > => > > => Would you feel better if we used a lawyer-provided boilerplate that > would > => apply to a 501c3 Non-Profit organization? > > Yes. > > I wouldn't want a lawyer designing my network architecture, and I don't > think that LOPSA's core competence[1] is in designing legally binding > policy documents. > > The discussion here has been great--and I hope that it's provided a sense > of intent and tone that the membership[2] wants in a policy on harassment. > Perhaps that's enough information and background to enable the subject > matter expert to draft some policy language. > > Once the language is finalized, would this policy change be enacted > by the board, or do the LOPSA by-laws call for a member vote? I really > don't know how the organization is structured. > > > [1] certain members may individually be competent to draft legal documents, > but that's not the organization's strength or purpose > > [2] the members represented in this discussion--while influential--are a > very > limited sample of the LOPSA membership > > Mark > > => > => > => > => -- > => LITTLE GIRL: But which cookie will you eat FIRST? > => COOKIE MONSTER: Me think you have misconception of cookie-eating > process. > => > -- LITTLE GIRL: But which cookie will you eat FIRST? COOKIE MONSTER: Me think you have misconception of cookie-eating process. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
