Rod Makes Sense ** RE: Committee work beyond E balloting

[Rich Littleton]

First Item:  Rod's input was very valuable.  I grouched about the
content, but he does us all a great service by passing on what's being
said.  Thanks, Rod.

Second Item:  Who is bc500?  At least consider signing your letters.  

Third Item:  I'm not persuaded by bc500's perspective, as I indicate
below.  

______________________________________________________________________

On Mon, 28 Dec 1998, SCN User wrote:

> There is one other point that many people (including Rich) seem
> to be consistently unclear on.  That is the difference between
> SCNA Board and SCN.  I think you allude to this in your discussion
> Rod...and maybe it needs to be more explicitly stated.  SCN is
> a project of SCNA...admittedly pretty much our only project at this
> time...EXCom...made up of officers of the board and committee
> chairs...takes care of the running of the SCN project.  

I don't understand the relevance of the above.  Of course there's a
distinction, but what does that have to do with the discussion?

> Expenditures are recommended by EXCom and presented to the SCNA board
> for final approval. 

Red flag!  Red flag!  This requires a lot of good information that is
*owned* by only a few.  Right here the organization departs from
significant input from, or information to, the membership (The S C N A
membership, bc500, whoever you are.)  THAT's the point.  This is in
inside operation and most of us are not allowed to be insiders.

bc500 (whoever that is) simply does not deal with the fact that S C N A
members are not allowed to attend Excom meetings.  Let me repeat that for
those who missed it:  S C N A members are not allowed to attend Excom
meetings.

All in favor of input from the membership may now leave.  (Excom approach)

> Any member of SCN or SCNA has input to EXCOM thru involvement
> with the committees whose chairs are its members.  Again...SCNA and SCN
> are NOT the same thing!  This is not just semantics...it is a legal
> necessity as I understand it.

Helloooooo.  These S C N A members have ALREADY paid to get membership in
S C N A.  And one of the things that they are promised by the Promoter
mentailities on the board is:  voting rights.  Ah, but voting rights only
for the board members.  That might be okay, but the board members meet
only quaterly.  Excom meets monthly.  So these much heralded voting rights
we get as S C N A members lose some of their value.  And the un-elected
Excom chugs busily right along month after month churning out decisions of
organizational importance.

Again, not only can S C N A members not vote for Excom members, 
but S C N A members cannot even participate in the dicussions of Excom,
nor can S C N A members even observe Excom business. 

Actually, to me, it makes S C N A membership more like SCN membership.
Didn't anyone tell bc500 and Excom and the board that there is supposed to
be a difference between S C N A membership and SCN membership?

And when bc500 (whoever that is) says any member can have influence by
participating on committees WHOSE CHAIRS SIT ON EXCOM, that has to be
leading candidate for snake oil salesman/woman of the year.  That's like
telling women in 1800 America that they could have influence on elections
by being in a family whose male members can vote.  Let's hear a show of
hands/voices who admire THAT type of thinking.

Now, of course this is not to say there is an evil plot afoot.  But it is
to say that processes are being set up, frequently with good intentions,
that undermine (1) member input, (2) open flow of information, (3) a
spirit of inclusiveness, (4) diversity of input, (5) broad-based
membership activity.

I could see a subcommittee of the board dealing with budgetary concerns.
But it would be in meetings that were open.

It's likely that many decisions would come out the same from a closed vs.
an open model.  However, by adoping a model based on secrecy, you lose
all of the five elements mentioned above, and you lose ACCOUNTABILITY.

A bad bargain.



Yours truly,

be718 (I'm hiding)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *