We have had some hurt feeling here because new folks appointed by Managers were not informed, and some folks that know better. posted in this forum and should not have.
Add to agenda Item 2.8
Review:
Post/view/access rights: BoD Forum
This BoD Forum was intended to be a place that the BoD could let things really hang out. Its not public and should not be censored or moderated by anyone. this is the one place that members of the BoD and Staff can really "duke it out" if necessary. Better here than in public. This would not happen because members of the BoD and Staff are all gentleman anyway. The privilege needs to be there however if they wish to 'duke it out'.
Xo's and Co's. Are authorized. One fine point however .. if a CO elects to have the 1st voice someone other than himself, he/she should not post here. If the Xo is not part of the squads appointed 'voice' .. they should not post here. This forum in terms of CO and XO is actually the 1st and 2nd voice.
Staff. Staff is a loose term that the BoD might want to 'firm up'. There is a Item of "definition of terms" made up by Joker that may address/solve this problem. When the BoD and these forums were first established .. we didn't have a lot of terms .. never mind any help in the way of 'staff' . Staff was thought of as "Managers" that are put in place by the BoD. Said "managers" do need a place to discuss things in private with the BoD.
This forums was never meant for a "public" type of discussion are were anyone with any responsibility within the USAAC was allowed to post. It is for Co/Xo, Director, League Manager, Fun Event Manager, USA Rep or sysops or what ever he is called
.. ie Temper at present, Web Manager etc.Term Staff as used here was not meant to be a Managers appointed assistants.
Again, this should be addressed and possible the password here changed. We have hurt some feelings and had some misunderstandings on innocent parties due to their not being informed etc. Now would be the time for the BoD to reset the rules for this forum, eliminate this forum, rename this forum .. or whatever
This was on the agenda last meeting but there was more important matters on hand .. and this could wait. Now I've noticed a couple of posts that are in error .. but no need to point that out in public as the essence of the post was correct. However, each squad is allowed ONE vote .. not two. ONLY the 1st voice and Director vote on Items. There are two representatives from each squad, 1st voice and 2nd voice. When a 1st voice is not in attendance the 2nd voice is by default 1st voice. With our current setup .. there are only 5 votes in total .. not 9.
Review:
Charter: BoD votes (See note in BoD) ninja.gif
Most meetings, the chair has been in error with collecting "votes" by extending more votes than allowed. So far .. no vote has been close enough to affect a difference .. but clearly we should get back to the correct protocols... or change/ammend the charter.
1st Voice is always allowed floor time at each meeting of the BoD. Director is always allowed floor time and 'should chair' the meeting but may if he wishes offer the chair to another member or staff member that is familiar with the BoD procedures. If time allows floor time is extended to 2nd voice for input and opinion.
When an Item has been fully covered, the "public" should be given an opportunity to offer input before "votes" are casts so that all 1st voices my absorb that input which may or may not affect their vote.
It was intended that 'items' be covered in the order they are on the Agenda. 1st Agenda items are items carried over from previous meetings, those items must be addressed first (exception emergency agenda items). This process is so that no 'item' can be forced to the bottom of the list for meeting after meeting thus a defacto "veto". There is 'weakness' here .. be cautious.
Please review the Charter and see if your interpretation is the same as I have pointed out here as far as 'votes'. If not.. it should be addressed here in this private forum/thread via reply.