[Fwd: Re: [Leaplist] proposed change to LEAP by-laws]

[Mark W. Alexander]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2007 at 01:05:51AM -0400, Phil Barnett wrote:
> On Friday 27 July 2007, tonyb wrote:
> > The perception is accurate however they could be motivated to not pay
> > dues as well as not serve. ?I think at that point its LEAP that looses.
> >
> > Time for a new topic...
> 
> So, what you all are suggesting here is that something that was brought up by 
> a member, moved, seconded and passed should be ignored?
> 
> I believe that flies in the face of our bylaws.

As long as you're not suggesting that anything a member proposes should just be
accepted and passed, I agree. (Of course, I have no say since I'm too far away
to be a voting member :( )

I agree that the proposal is a little too much bureaucratic overhead for any
value it might have. I'm still grateful the executive committe took the time
to hear the concern and bring it up for discussion.

Hearing a concern, investigating the facts, balancing the needs and priorities
and still saying "No, it's not really a good idea" is called "Leadership." Our
governmental representatives should learn how to do it, too.

mwa
-- 
Mark W. Alexander
slash at dotnetslash.net

The contents of this message authored by Mark W. Alexander are released under
the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial license.  Copyright of quoted
materials, if any, are retained by the original author(s).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/