The President's role has in my experience been seen as more ceremonial and PR - Advocacy for the pipes is what the job needs, and got from its last 2 incumbents. An analogy might be the Chancellor as against the VC of a University. Choosing a short list of outstanding players would be the easy bit - Unfortunately, choosing one from it could start a war!
John -----Original Message----- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Greenley, Gordon Sent: 19 May 2009 10:21 To: julia....@nspipes.co.uk; nsp@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [NSP] Re: New NPS president I don't normally get involved in these kinds of discussions, as I joined NPS to enjoy playing the pipes, and I'm pleased that, like Paul, I don't live in the North East. It seems to me that there are, of course, two other options. First, why does NPS need a President? In the rules (para 17) the President's roles are to preside at some meetings, to attend functions, and to take a continuing interest in the aims and activities. Well, there's already a Chairman to do the first role, and the other two roles, it seems to me, are carried out by all NPS members, to a greater or lesser extent. So perhaps the function of President is redundant. Second, if we must have a President why not someone that the majority of members will have a great amount of respect for, like one of our outstanding current players (I'm sure a short list would be easy), or someone who has already demonstrated an outstanding contribution. It seems to me that our last President was in both these categories. For me this would be preferable to a politician (and sorry but we can't ignore the current climate), who isn't even a member, who seemingly isn't associated with members, and has seemingly made no extra ordinary contribution to piping. Gordon Greenley -----Original Message----- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Julia Say Sent: 18 May 2009 20:35 To: nsp@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [NSP] New NPS president On 18 May 2009, pipe...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: > there are others as worthy if not more of this office There is no > rush so consult ALL the membership and not just the few in the "inner > sanctom"!!!! Guy (and all interested members): If you consult the society rules you will see that: a) the selection of the new president is the responsibility of the NPS committee b) there is a time limit of 6 months The majority of the current committee interpreted this to mean they make the decision themselves: when it was suggested that a call for suggestions be placed in the newsletter, this was not thought appropriate. It was also thought inappropriate to publish the original list of suggested names with which the committee started. For an EGM to be held by the beginning of August, the time constraints on the process are actually fairly tight, particularly should the deciding body's first, second or even third choices decline the post. (I am not saying this did or did not happen: it is merely an example). A final observation: it can be the case that as NPS Hon. Sec. I have to administer, announce or otherwise deal with decisions with which I personally disagree. That is part of the job. Again I'm not saying whether or not this is the case in this instance, but don't shoot the messenger - it could be that they agree with you. Julia Say NPS Hon Sec. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
