Re: AIS:2002 Symposium
- Subject: Re: [iris-talk] AIS:2002 Symposium
- From: "robert stewart" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:39:08 -0400
That is not a fair name to give any iris "Green Gangrene" who would buy it or vote for an iris with such a name. I hope you all are kidding about the name.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [iris-talk] AIS:2002 Symposium
> I would appreciate an example of what you think I should have said.
> How much history should I have gone into? I thought (obviously
> that the simple statement was enough.
Well, our club met and we voted! But, did we do it correctly? We had no
guidelines. We had to make up rules as we went, almost. Our first
ground rule was that an iris had to get five votes to get recorded as
a favorite on the ballot.
Several questions arose and the most important was if seven people
vote for GREEN GANGRENE, do we record all seven votes or just place
one x in the blank? We decided on the latter, so each iris that was
voted on got only one vote, provided at least five members raised
their hands. Is that the way the ballot is supposed to be marked?
We still don't know? There is an "O" for the second member of the
family, but in the case of affiliate voting, what are the other
letters for the third, fourth votes, etc? Or, can we use numbers and
record "7" for GREEN GANGRENE? Who knows?
When one affiliate votes one way and another votes another, I can
see that all affiliate votes should be thrown out.
I think Ellen and I are in the same camp on this along with other
affiliates when they try to make this work. There just isn't enough
information to make it work for affiliates this first time around.
Gerry explained earlier:
> You are correct that the discussion did not make it into the minutes of
> the fall 2000 board meeting. The minutes would fill the Bulletin if that
> kind of detail were available. And perhaps it should be, somewhere, but
> not in the Bulletin.
Walter responded again:
I consider this major policy. Whether it is a change in policy or not, I don't
know. I have not seen or don't remember the original policy as it has
never been implemented in the two AIS regions I have voted in. I
further think the decision to put the affiliate vote on the ballot
should have been brought to the Board and approved by them first.
Then, it would have been in the minutes. As most things are referred
to a committee and studied, the "Affiliates Vote" should have
received this attention because the mechanics of the vote seem flawed
as evidenced by our struggle with it this afternoon. A committee
would have provided guidelines and not left the Affiliates Vote for
somebody just to find in the directions and miraculously know how to
Now we have a "Florida Vote" situation in AIS!
> Gerry Snyder, AIS Symposium Chair, Region 15 RVP
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Small business owners...
Tell us what you think!
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/