- Joined
- Sep 17, 2007
- Messages
- 31
- Likes
- 0
When by laws get re written does the membership vote on them or is it just what ever the board decides?
Clay
Clay
-
Congratulations to John K. Jordan winner of the June 2025 Turning Challenge (click here for details) -
Congratulations to John Shannon"Cherry Bowl" being selected as Turning of the Week for June 30 2025 (click here for details) -
Welcome new registering member. Your username must be your real First and Last name (for example: John Doe). "Screen names" and "handles" are not allowed and your registration will be deleted if you don't use your real name. Also, do not use all caps nor all lower case.
New BY-LAW question
- Thread starter Choice Woods
- Start date
Clay,
This has already been talked about and the bottom line is this:
There might be a release of each bylaw revision for membership to review before an up or down vote by the membership.
Mark "Mad Dog" Mandell and Ron Sardo who are co-chairs on the re-write committee have eluded to this possibility.
It is of course not up to them, as it is AAW board member Dale Larson who makes the final call.
Curtis Thompson
# 15049
This has already been talked about and the bottom line is this:
There might be a release of each bylaw revision for membership to review before an up or down vote by the membership.
Mark "Mad Dog" Mandell and Ron Sardo who are co-chairs on the re-write committee have eluded to this possibility.
It is of course not up to them, as it is AAW board member Dale Larson who makes the final call.
Curtis Thompson
# 15049
Not quite correct.
1. I'm not the "co-chair." I just spend more time than others making a fool of myself in public.
2. It is not Dale Larson who will make any decision as to how the amendments will be presented to the Membership. The issue is on the 9/8 Agenda to be presented for discussion by Dale. It is the full Board who will make the decision.
Open questions remain as how Members will vote on the amendments; as a single document or article-by-article. My personal view is for the latter, however, some of the revisions, to avoid internal conflicts in the rules, are interrelated. Thus a vote against one article may very well create serious issues in one or more others that do get approved. The explanatory material that will go out to each member with the body of the new articles will take a serious amount of work so that each member will have the best chance of understanding the hows, whys, and wherefores (trying very hard to hold that last to an absolute minimum) of the changes before they vote.
I am also pushing for a comment or Q&A period on a special, members only, board on the AAW website.
Last edited:
John Van Domelen
Retired Forum Admin
@Mark
Easily enough done.
Edit: to clarify - I could create a forum section visible only to AAW members.
Last edited:
Yes, John, I know. 
It's just that the decision on the entire approval procedure, of which the "private" comment board would be only a part, hasn't been made yet.
It's just that the decision on the entire approval procedure, of which the "private" comment board would be only a part, hasn't been made yet.
A great way to handle it Mark. I really like the members only board. I hope John's idea works but I'm afraid it is going to take some strict, even handed moderating to keep it on track and eliminate some of the blood letting. It will need to be held to the bylaws with none of the "see I knew they were bad" comments. I hope everyone agrees to this approach.
Strictly moderated will be an issue as these guys can't be glued to one board 24/7.
You can count on a number of people being disappointed and displeased that things weren't done the way they wanted it, but that's what makes the process valid so long as the flames are kept under control.
You can count on a number of people being disappointed and displeased that things weren't done the way they wanted it, but that's what makes the process valid so long as the flames are kept under control.
R
Ron Sardo
Guest
What would work well is if a forum could be placed behind the membership area. Makes for easy validation.
To help define the discussion: What are the purposes of placing in a members only area? If it's confidentiality and member privilege, know that whatever is posted will be copy/pasted to other forums in short order.
Owen,
I don't see the benefit to that kind of action or that kind of talk. As WNelson said to Andi Wolfe on another thread:
"Stop poking the bear." I think the suggestion might actually help get a better focus, non members "stirring the pot" won't really clarify our direction.
To restrict who can post as the issues will be such that only members have any say in what gets done. No disrespect to non-members and the General Public who are vitally interested(not
), but the copy and paste stuff with the resulting rants can and should be disregarded at this point. The idea for the restricted forum is to allow AAW members to submit meaningful constructive input on how the Association and its members will operate going forward. I would also suggest that members who may not be able to access the website for one reason or another, would have an opportunity to send in comments that could be scanned and posted as well.
R
Ron Sardo
Guest
I'm well aware that once anything is posted on any forum or even sent in an email will get passed around and posted somewhere else.
By keeping it in the members only area, only members in good standing will be able to contribute to the discussion.
What will be posted elsewhere or emailed will not matter in a Q&A discussion.
Why not keep it in the public sector and non members can read, but not post. There may be some discussion that could sway a non member to join the AAW just so they could post an answer.
George, it was a serious question and I did not intend to poke anyone. The copypasters will transfer any info to other forums (forna?
) without any qualms of confidentiality. I was merely commenting that if confidentiality was the goal it would have been futile.
George, it was a serious question and I did not intend to poke anyone. The copypasters will transfer any info to other forums (forna?
I agree with you... I just thought that while that may be true, what Ron subsequently posted was also true. I don't think it's about confidentiality, I would like to see it for two reasons
Less mud in the water, added by people who are not members of this organization.
And an extra layer of annoyance (logging in and out) which will slow even more of us from bothering with this venue to "make noise."
In the end, there may be some good ideas and valuable insights that will arise from these "discussions," but in the end, those ideas and insights still have to be moved into the actual political arena... AND, if the non member "mongers" have to decide whether or not to join, they'll also have to decide whether or not to invest some dollars in order to participate. People who have to spend money are generally serious and not just trouble makers.
LET ME BE CLEAR: I don't think that everyone who agitates without $kin in the game is nothing more than a trouble maker (OK, maybe Mark Mandell before he joined up and pitched in - thank you for that). There have been a lot of good ideas from the sidelines (even From Mark Mandell).
Just my way of saying the organization is STILL worth investing more than words.
Last edited:
Okay Mark and Ron enough
Mark and Ron do you realize just how hard it is to keep up a good outrage when agreeing with what you two are saying? Just knock it off before world or at least AAW peace breaks out.:mad:
Mark and Ron do you realize just how hard it is to keep up a good outrage when agreeing with what you two are saying? Just knock it off before world or at least AAW peace breaks out.:mad:
Stuart,
On behalf of my fellow committee members, Mark and Ron, please allow me to apologize. With all that's going on, it's far too easy to misplace our instructions on what to be for and against. Being a puppet can become very confusing. (Who knew?) I'm sure we'll quickly get our act together and soon will march boldly out against (or for) whatever it is you were for (or against) and the world will return to normal.
Stuart,
On behalf of my fellow committee members, Mark and Ron, please allow me to apologize. With all that's going on, it's far too easy to misplace our instructions on what to be for and against. Being a puppet can become very confusing. (Who knew?) I'm sure we'll quickly get our act together and soon will march boldly out against (or for) whatever it is you were for (or against) and the world will return to normal.
Up until this afternoon, my favorite post from this whole mess was "What a train wreck, I wonder where they're going to bury the survivors."
But, your post, David, is the Grand Prize Winner!
Last edited:
Thanks, Al. You realize that each member of the bylaws revision committee is cursing to themselves, saying, "There will be on living with him now." Don't you?