Re: The controversy needs a sabbatical...
RE:>>I know Dan and he always
speaks the truth. The governing body of the AHS are, for the most
part, rather out of place. They should get a life.
I know very little about anyone here, really. Oh, I met
a few at the 2000 convention, and we've visited a lot on the list servers.
Personally, I love to debate but there are rules in a legitimate debate,
most of which we tend not to follow here. However, lots of
issues we talk about need to have the human element removed as much as
possible. I fell into that trap just recently; it's just a lot easier
to communicate based on emotion rather than the facts.
So, I have to apologize for being a human and accept the consequences
from having a tongue (fingers) that get me into trouble. The primary
benefit of further communications (on these issues of some importance to
the further directions of the AHS) is more about preventing failure than
it is about ensuring success. If we take actions that deter new members,
then that is a mistake. If we take actions that abuse current members,
then that is a mistake.
The reason most of us would like the board (and Irwin and Kevin, in
particular) to reexamine this issue (Ben's request for review) is not so
much about review of the previous decisions but more about how can we make
even small improvements in the operations in the FUTURE. As we move
forward with new people to assume these positions (anyone thinking they're
getting off this planet alive?), they will want to pass on to their replacements
good ideas that have accumulated while they have served. While we
(the hosta-open crew) are just the tip of the iceberg of the membership,
I believe there are some very caring people who subscribe to these lists.
These are some VERY active members, generally. From these discussions,
hopefully, there can be gleaned some wisdom.
I would like to know where we look on the Internet for the Agenda items
that are to be part of the next Board meeting. If they are NOT on
the net, but in print someplace, I will be glad to post them, if that is
allowed. I'm sure there are several issues that the Board reviews
each meeting that are of interest to the membership, and even though most
of us are not enabled to have a vote on those decisions, we can still try
to "lobby" for or against certain issues. However, we need advance
notification to do so.
Most Boards are elected by the membership in order to RUN things.
When the board tries to micro manage the Directors, or the members try
to micro manage the Board, we run the risk of removing the authority we've
entrusted to them. We are attempting to defeat the very reason a
group NEEDS a board of Directors. Do WE want to do all of that work?
Well maybe, but it's not our place to do it unless we are in that position.
We've got to let go and let them get the job done. However,
they must reach out to the membership or risk losing the support of the
membership. Neither situation pleasant nor efficient.
Yes, the members need the board, the board needs the members.
If such agendas are currently posted, then I am remiss because I have
no knowledge of where there are posted. If members ARE allowed to
come to meetings (I assume it will be like city council meetings--a sentry
is posted by the door to keep the protests non-violent 8-)). And,
if there is a mechanism in place where members can request a copy of the
proposed agendas prior to the meeting, I am not aware of who I would
contact to receive a copy. Perhaps someone would let us know?
As for kicking anyone off the board because they called someone a liar,
I believe the average person does some lying on a frequent basis.
("Inside Edition" quoted 7 times a day this week. I can't believe
that the number is this high, but who knows). I can't comment really
on whether Dan would ever lie but from all of his posts, I would have to
agree with you, Clyde, that Dan appears to be a very honest person.
And also has a very keen interest in Hostas and the cause of the AHS. Nor
do I believe Irwin would intentionally distort the truth about someone's
character. One doesn't get to positions of authority in life by being
a total screwball. We all lend some credibility to the truths in
the Peter Principle, however; that's why it's called a "principle".
AT THE TIME THEY ASSUMED THE POST, 99% of the people who assume these roles
had above average dedication to fulfilling the responsibilities required,
and I believe most take these jobs seriously, even long after they
step aside. That said, some DO make mistakes, and major ones.
Thus, when these elected leaders start to stick their feet in their
mouths, the least we can do is try and discourage them from doing that
with BOTH feet at the same time. This is a nasty situation when
both feet are in ones mouth. We must remind our leaders that they
can only get one foot in there at one time. We all know this, of
course, but we sometimes forget. The least we members can do is help
them get one foot unstuck prior letting them try and stuff another one
in there. And when we start thinking we are a whole lot better than
the current crop, it's probably time to clean off the mirror, then to stick
your face right up close for a good long look. IF you see a "perfect"
person looking back at you, you're either blind or ignorant.
Of course, if you are board member and you don't like what you see,
you can always decline acceptance of the next year's nomination; allow
people to say, "Thank you for your dedicated service" and then let some
other poor sap step into that hot water for a while. You weren't
having all that much fun at it anyhow...
Clyde, FIDO--Forget It and Drive On
http://dev.hostahaven.com/discus -- Have you talked about your Hostas