- Joined
- May 14, 2005
- Messages
- 75
- Likes
- 0
- Location
- Kennebunkport, Maine, USA
- Website
- www.mainebowls.com
Tonight I attended my first BOD meeting via phone. A few comments about the setup:
difficult to know who is talking;
challenging to keep a phone line open for 90+ minutes;
challenging to keep a phone to your ear for 90+minutes.
A few comments about the meeting:
Why was there a prolonged discussion about giving our mailing list to an insurance agent? Binh was really pushing for it. That discussion should have been halted at the start instead of having that uncomfortable silence before the motion to respect member privacy. Privacy is the issue pure and simple. Binh just didn't seem to get it. (Seems to me that privacy was at the forefront of discussion not too long ago.)
How does one insurance agent (a John Hall ?) get to present a spam proposal to all the members? Shouldn't the BOD have proposals and bids?
Are we getting a new logo without input from members? From what I heard, Binh's design proposal(s) will be talked about at the BOD meeting in St. Paul. ( I can't help thinking it will be less phallic.) My impression is it will be presented (and voted upon?) in a closed meeting. Please let me know if I misinterpreted and if there were any mention of the membership involvement in this proposed logo change.
I also picked up a hint that the voting for the new BOD members was really close, but the BOD wants to never have this election, or any future election, list individual totals. Do the candidates get to know the exact numbers? If I were a losing candidate, I'd certainly like to know if a recount were possible.
Finally, in this age of technology, isn't there a way to have this meeting broadcast on the web? Possibly with video? Or video recorded and available on the website?
And by the way, am I allowed to post negative comments on this site?
difficult to know who is talking;
challenging to keep a phone line open for 90+ minutes;
challenging to keep a phone to your ear for 90+minutes.
A few comments about the meeting:
Why was there a prolonged discussion about giving our mailing list to an insurance agent? Binh was really pushing for it. That discussion should have been halted at the start instead of having that uncomfortable silence before the motion to respect member privacy. Privacy is the issue pure and simple. Binh just didn't seem to get it. (Seems to me that privacy was at the forefront of discussion not too long ago.)
How does one insurance agent (a John Hall ?) get to present a spam proposal to all the members? Shouldn't the BOD have proposals and bids?
Are we getting a new logo without input from members? From what I heard, Binh's design proposal(s) will be talked about at the BOD meeting in St. Paul. ( I can't help thinking it will be less phallic.) My impression is it will be presented (and voted upon?) in a closed meeting. Please let me know if I misinterpreted and if there were any mention of the membership involvement in this proposed logo change.
I also picked up a hint that the voting for the new BOD members was really close, but the BOD wants to never have this election, or any future election, list individual totals. Do the candidates get to know the exact numbers? If I were a losing candidate, I'd certainly like to know if a recount were possible.
Finally, in this age of technology, isn't there a way to have this meeting broadcast on the web? Possibly with video? Or video recorded and available on the website?
And by the way, am I allowed to post negative comments on this site?