Question/Concern

[JTrott]

Just wondering why the vote for Bill(bstreep) is being held in the Charter Member area when the sponsors, who have a right to vote cannot see that area. Here is the quote, taken from the by-laws.

Paragraph 3: All Sponsor/Commercial members in good standing shall be entitled to the following:
a. A membership card, this card shall be a receipt for payment of dues.
b. A copy of the By-Laws.
c. Notification of all changes to the By-Laws adopted after the member’s initial day of membership.
d. The right to participate in all the general activities of the organization.
e. Eligibility for appointment as a member of any committee of the organization.
f. Eligibility for appointment to head any committee of the organization.
g. The right to nominate and vote on the election of the officers of the organization and such other issues as are put to vote.
h. Are not elegible for a board or officer position.

Underlined is my concern.

Jason

[Mr Cob]

Good question Jason.

Paragraph 1: The officers of the organization shall be a President, Vice-President, Secretary and Treasurer.

[Mr Cob]

and...

Paragraph 5: New Board members
a. Any new prospective board members must be approved by a simple majority vote of charter members, it will be a yes/no vote that will remain open for one week.

[JTrott]

Thanks Rob. Seems like you answer alot of questions like this. Hopefully you can help with this one too.

What would and such other issues as are put to vote. Entail? Meaning what would the "officers" consider "other issues".

Just would like some clarification.

I know you will answer this, so THANKS ROB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jason

[Mr Cob]

I tried to answer the first one just by posting the by-laws and without doing any translating as to avoid speaking my opinions, however I knew you were going to ask about that. LOL.

Well, I would assume that would mean any other issues that we as a Board or club would like the Sponsor's feedback on.

But, you said... what would the "officers" consider other issues.

...I'm not an officer, I'm a Director.

[JTrott]

But, you said... what would the "officers" consider other issues.

...I'm not an officer, I'm a Director

I knew you would notice that.....darn it.....misworded. I think you know what I meant though, so here goes again.

What would the Officers and DIRECTORS consider to be and such other issues as are put to vote. Maybe now I can get your opinion, if you have one on this question other that what you already posted.

Thanks again Rob,
Jason

[Mr Cob]

That's all I got man. We'll let a veteran chime in.

I assume that part was left as a general statement purposely, that's my opinion though. Definitely something that could be looked at closely as the by-laws are being revised to meet the club's needs.

[JTrott]

Alright Rob. Thanks again.

We will see if another Director or Officer will chime in. Although, I will not hold my breath.

Jason

[Bill S]

Jason,

The bylaws specifically permit a vote by Charter Members, to overturn any Board decision. Not sure how that would/could happen. But, it would be interesting to sort out if the occasion were to come up....

[drunkenclam]

Jason,

The bylaws specifically permit a vote by Charter Members, to overturn any Board decision. Not sure how that would/could happen. But, it would be interesting to sort out if the occasion were to come up....

Sorry, you cannot be a BOD member. You have far too much insight and know the the bylaws.

[Bill S]

You are having way too much fun...

[aggman]

Alright Rob. Thanks again.

We will see if another Director or Officer will chime in. Although, I will not hold my breath.

Jason

jason, i think you should know that it is comments like these that prevent active participation and more issues to arise everyday here on maast. if you would like an answer ask, and when someone with the information has time they will answer. please be patient and understand that you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar...

as for your question.

the bylaw is referring to sponsor specific issues such as term limits, fees, requirements. for example, if maast decides that it will begin charging more for sponsorhip spots, it would have to be taken up in a special vote with sponsors only. things like that.

~alex

[Bill S]

the bylaw is referring to sponsor specific issues such as term limits, fees, requirements. for example, if maast decides that it will begin charging more for sponsorhip spots, it would have to be taken up in a special vote with sponsors only. things like that. ~alex

Alex, where did the above interpretation come from? That's NOT what the bylaws say:

ARTICLE IV – MEETINGS
Section 2. Meetings of the Board of Directors
Paragraph 4: The membership is granted the right to alter or reverse any decision of the Board of Directors by a two-thirds vote from all members in good standings of the organization.

Now, please, tell me how/where your interpretation, could possibly come from the above? Y'all can't just make this stuff up! Flawed, or not, the bylaws DO exist.

[drunkenclam]

You are having way too much fun...

Fun...... what is your definition of fun?
Or maybe I just love the hobby. Or maybe it's just a passion. I don't know. I would rather give frags away to promote the hobby to newbs then sell them to make a buck. Current rules prevent me from doing such so I resort to store credit from sponsors. I thought that this site was "to promote the hobby" not what this site "would profit me" or what my status as a "representative" will gain me. Now one needs 2000 posts and three years as member to make a "contribution" to the site. Such a shame. Flame me. Ban me. I will speak my mind. If there is opposition so be it. Do you RC? Do you read PMs.

[drunkenclam]

Alex, where did the above interpretation come from? That's NOT what the bylaws say:

ARTICLE IV – MEETINGS
Section 2. Meetings of the Board of Directors
Paragraph 4: The membership is granted the right to alter or reverse any decision of the Board of Directors by a two-thirds vote from all members in good standings of the organization.

Now, please, tell me how/where your interpretation, could possibly come from the above? Y'all can't just make this stuff up! Flawed, or not, the bylaws DO exist.

Now just exactly is having wayyy tooooo much fun. :shades:

[ACE]

[QUOTE=bstreep;697824 Y'all can't just make this stuff up! QUOTE]


LOL...this is going to be fun!

[ACE]

Fun...... what is your definition of fun?
Or maybe I just love the hobby. Or maybe it's just a passion. I don't know. I would rather give frags away to promote the hobby to newbs then sell them to make a buck. Current rules prevent me from doing such so I resort to store credit from sponsors. I thought that this site was "to promote the hobby" not what this site "would profit me" or what my status as a "representative" will gain me. Now one needs 2000 posts and three years as member to make a "contribution" to the site. Such a shame. Flame me. Ban me. I will speak my mind. If there is opposition so be it. Do you RC? Do you read PMs.

Clearly you are passionate, and I believe that is a good thing. However, opposition has not gone over well recently, watch out someone is going to push the "ban button" on you...LOL

[princer7]

I am speaking as a fellow charter member here.....

It is comments like this that stir the pot and make things worse for everyone. If you have a question, ask it in a manner that is respectful to everyone else on this forum. This hobby should be what is fun... not picking someone apart for trying to answer your question. If you do not agree with his reply, then state it in an adult manner.

[BigKGlen]

In line with Jason, Sponsors are Charter Members as well. With the current restrictions, the Sponsors are not permitted to access the Charter Forum. As a new Director is being voted upon, a Sponsor's opinion should be allowed to be heard.

drunkenclam, I am ALL FOR exercising one's freedom of speech. But I do have to agree with princer7, some of your comments are a bit abrasive and could inflame into an argument. JMO

[princer7]

There are quite a bit of revisions that needs to be made to the ByLaws and Terms of Use. This site is ever evolving and growing by leaps and bounds. I hope these issues we face can be turned into something constructive in revising the rules of the forum to make it better for all members. Please recognize it as something that we are trying to working on.

I would look forward to hearing anyone's positive input by PM about inconsistancies or gaps in the ByLaws and Terms of Use that needs to be addressed.

[JTrott]

With all due respect, and I do mean all due respect:

Why is everything recommended to be taken to PM. As long as we are all remaining civil and adult, why does it need to be hidden? All members should be able to know what peoples issues/concerns are. Why are we trying to hide member, whether Charter or Web, concerns. Just because it is outta site, does not mean it is outta mind. Posting issues/concerns instead of PMing someone would also help alleviate duplicate concerns. Less to look at/read.

Jason

[Bill S]

Agree, Jason.

Would there be a big club somewhere that might have a decent set of bylaws already hashed out we can "borrow"? Seems to me that might be am option versus trying to repair this health care bill - I mean bylaws.

[princer7]

Jason, my suggestion to take it to PM was so that it doesn't turn into a debate, dredge up issues (past, current, or rumors), or degrade into something else.... just trying to keep focused on changes to the wording of the Bylaws and Terms of Use. I do not have alterior motives and welcome input.

[ACE]

I agree Jason, that is part of where the frustration comes from. Transparency should be the goal, just because someone might get their toes stepped on doesn't mean we take the conversation into hiding. As long as everyone remains civil no reason to take the conversation behind closed doors. That is part of what makes us America, we all have different opinions, and some we are passionate about. But, a difference in opinion or asking a difficult question is not offensive, as long as we behave like adults in asking the questions. sound right Princer?

[ACE]

Jason, my suggestion to take it to PM was so that it doesn't turn into a debate, dredge up issues (past, current, or rumors), or degrade into something else.... just trying to keep focused on changes to the wording of the Bylaws and Terms of Use. I do not have alterior motives and welcome input.

Nothing wrong with a debate is there?

[princer7]

The goal at this point is just identifying the problem areas of the Bylaws and Terms of use. One step at a time. :)

[princer7]

A new thread has been started.

http://maast.org/forums/showthread.php?p=698190#post698190

[MattK]

Why is it locked?

[princer7]

Shouldn't be... let me check it out :confused:

[princer7]

It's not locked. Maybe you caught it when I was making a spelling correction :D

[txav8r]

It's only locked for you Matthew.


Just kidding. Does it still show up as locked? It shows as an open thread for me.

[aggman]

Alex, where did the above interpretation come from? That's NOT what the bylaws say:

ARTICLE IV – MEETINGS
Section 2. Meetings of the Board of Directors
Paragraph 4: The membership is granted the right to alter or reverse any decision of the Board of Directors by a two-thirds vote from all members in good standings of the organization.

Now, please, tell me how/where your interpretation, could possibly come from the above? Y'all can't just make this stuff up! Flawed, or not, the bylaws DO exist.

sorry bill i was referrring to jasons question regarding sponsor votes. i didn;t mean for it to look like i was referring to your post.

~alex

[aggman]

Fun...... what is your definition of fun?
Or maybe I just love the hobby. Or maybe it's just a passion. I don't know. I would rather give frags away to promote the hobby to newbs then sell them to make a buck. Current rules prevent me from doing such so I resort to store credit from sponsors. I thought that this site was "to promote the hobby" not what this site "would profit me" or what my status as a "representative" will gain me. Now one needs 2000 posts and three years as member to make a "contribution" to the site. Such a shame. Flame me. Ban me. I will speak my mind. If there is opposition so be it. Do you RC? Do you read PMs.

hmmm, drunkenclam, i don't know where you are getting your information, but let me clarify a few things...

giving away frags to 'newbs' truly is a great and wonderful thing.

there is nothing in the bylaws or terms of use that would prevent you from doing this. there is no rule that says you have to make money. there is a rule in the selling forum that you have to state and asking price, but come on, how hard is it to ask for $0, or maybe just a 'conversation' or something like that. members give things away all the time.

and there are no minimums required to make a contribution. you can make a contribution on you first day and first post. the terms do state you need to be a member for 3 months and have a minimum 100 post in order to utilize the selling forums, but that is not too much to ask.

we are a forum of like-minded hobbyists who come here to learn about the hobby, grow our collections and interact with people who have the same interests. sometimes we disagree, but we are all adults and we move on. if 'contributing' to something like that really bothers you, then maybe you are frequenting the wrong site.

this post isn't meant to be argumentative or a tool to single you out. i don't know who you are, or really care to know at this point. but i think continuously posting in a negative manner is counterproductive. you do nothing for your case by alienating those who can help you. if you have an issue, a valid issue, bring it up in a mature fashion and keep it productive and you will get your resolution. yeah, it really is that easy.

oh and btw, calling for people to flame or ban you, and continuing to post insinuations that are untrue is called 'inciting' and is against the by-laws. no questions about that. but instead of getting yourself warned or banned, then complaining of unfair treatment later, why don't you do us all a favor and become a productive member and help us make maast better?

~alex

[JTrott]

as for your question.

the bylaw is referring to sponsor specific issues such as term limits, fees, requirements. for example, if maast decides that it will begin charging more for sponsorhip spots, it would have to be taken up in a special vote with sponsors only. things like that.

~alex

I am not sure where that comes from, but I did not read that in the bylaws. If I missed it, could you post a link for me, or copy and paste it here. I don't recall seeing anything in the bylaws that referred to the sponsors having a vote for anything specifically.

Jason

[aggman]

I am not sure where that comes from, but I did not read that in the bylaws. If I missed it, could you post a link for me, or copy and paste it here. I don't recall seeing anything in the bylaws that referred to the sponsors having a vote for anything specifically.

Jason


the answer i posted was in response to your question regarding sponsor votes. you had asked the question in a previous post as shown below.



Thanks Rob. Seems like you answer alot of questions like this. Hopefully you can help with this one too.

What would and such other issues as are put to vote. Entail? Meaning what would the "officers" consider "other issues".

Just would like some clarification.

I know you will answer this, so THANKS ROB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jason


so basically my understanding of your question was what would the bod consider an issue that would require a vote of the sponsor members. my answer to that is anything that would specifically pertain to our sponsors. examples would be sponsorship fees, term limits, general business issues, things like that.

maybe i just didn't get what you were asking. it has happened before. lol. if i did misinterpret yor question, please rephrase and post it again so we can figure this out.

~alex

[drunkenclam]

hmmm, drunkenclam, i don't know where you are getting your information, but let me clarify a few things...

giving away frags to 'newbs' truly is a great and wonderful thing.

there is nothing in the bylaws or terms of use that would prevent you from doing this. there is no rule that says you have to make money. there is a rule in the selling forum that you have to state and asking price, but come on, how hard is it to ask for $0, or maybe just a 'conversation' or something like that. members give things away all the time.

I believe you answer this for yourself below. I am not able to post in that forum to even ask for $0. Can it be posted in general or would that be out of line? Not sure what you mean by "just a 'conversation' or something like that" so am unable to address it.


and there are no minimums required to make a contribution. you can make a contribution on you first day and first post. the terms do state you need to be a member for 3 months and have a minimum 100 post in order to utilize the selling forums, but that is not too much to ask.

Thank you for stating the obvious as far as contributions go. I am also aware of the selling forum rules and exaggerated in my previous post. But thank you again for the reminder.


we are a forum of like-minded hobbyists who come here to learn about the hobby, grow our collections and interact with people who have the same interests. sometimes we disagree, but we are all adults and we move on. if 'contributing' to something like that really bothers you, then maybe you are frequenting the wrong site.

Where did I say making a contribution bothered me? Yes, people will disagree and as adults we should move along. I hope you practice it as well.


this post isn't meant to be argumentative or a tool to single you out. i don't know who you are, or really care to know at this point. but i think continuously posting in a negative manner is counterproductive. you do nothing for your case by alienating those who can help you. if you have an issue, a valid issue, bring it up in a mature fashion and keep it productive and you will get your resolution. yeah, it really is that easy.
There are a couple of comments that sounds argumentative to me and I’ll leave at that. For future reference who decides what a valid issue is?


oh and btw, calling for people to flame or ban you, and continuing to post insinuations that are untrue is called 'inciting' and is against the by-laws. no questions about that. but instead of getting yourself warned or banned, then complaining of unfair treatment later, why don't you do us all a favor and become a productive member and help us make maast better?
There was no calling out for a flame of ban. They were statements. As to untrue insinuations I have no idea what is or is not true. So I asked a question regarding it. If asking a question is “inciting” then I guess I’m guilty.

I will conduct myself as an adult and move on from this. Thank you for your suggestions.

[JTrott]

Alex. I am sorry, but if there is no answer, how hard is it to say, 'I don't know what that means?'. What I was looking for is 'there is no answer'. The reason I am waiting for SOMEONE to say that, is because there is no answer. I do respect the fact that you came on and tried to explain, but in all actuallity, there is no answer because the sponsors have no say in anything. That is why it is left open ended like that. When the sponsors had a concern/problem with the classifieds, the BODs solution, was to take away the sponsors ability to view the classifieds.......kinda messed up, but now we cannot complain because we have NO idea what is for sale.

We are not asking for the ability to vote, all we are asking for the clarification of the rules..

Alex, I am sorry that this comes down to you and I, but since no one else has stepped up and answered the question, it looks like you are taking the blunt of all this, and for that, I apologize.

Jason

[aggman]

drunkenclam you are right i made reference to using the sale thread without regard to you current post count. again i wasn't singling you out, it was a general reference to everyone that was reading the thread and came across your posting of inaccurate information. you say exxageration, i say intentional misleading...a never-ending cycle.

and i won't respond to the rest of your post. enough of us have been on these forums day and night trying to keep things civil to know exactly where posts like these lead. constant back and forth is counterproductive. just take it for what it is...a request for you to end the negative tone [whether intentional or not] and help us make maast a better place.

~alex

[drunkenclam]

drunkenclam you are right i made reference to using the sale thread without regard to you current post count. again i wasn't singling you out, it was a general reference to everyone that was reading the thread and came across your posting of inaccurate information. you say exxageration, i say intentional misleading...a never-ending cycle.

and i won't respond to the rest of your post. enough of us have been on these forums day and night trying to keep things civil to know exactly where posts like these lead. constant back and forth is counterproductive. just take it for what it is...a request for you to end the negative tone [whether intentional or not] and help us make maast a better place.

~alex

Fair enough. I think we have the same agenda.
Enjoy your weekend.

[aggman]

Alex. I am sorry, but if there is no answer, how hard is it to say, 'I don't know what that means?'. What I was looking for is 'there is no answer'. The reason I am waiting for SOMEONE to say that, is because there is no answer. I do respect the fact that you came on and tried to explain, but in all actuallity, there is no answer because the sponsors have no say in anything. That is why it is left open ended like that. When the sponsors had a concern/problem with the classifieds, the BODs solution, was to take away the sponsors ability to view the classifieds.......kinda messed up, but now we cannot complain because we have NO idea what is for sale.

We are not asking for the ability to vote, all we are asking for the clarification of the rules..

Alex, I am sorry that this comes down to you and I, but since no one else has stepped up and answered the question, it looks like you are taking the blunt of all this, and for that, I apologize.

Jason

i'm sorry jason i do not understand your point. if you ask a question that you think you already know the answer to, then doesn't that mean that you deliberately wasted all of our time?

and the reason i gave you an answer instead of say 'i don't know what that means', is because i do understand exactly what it means. it may not jive with a recent experience you have had, but that doesn't change the meaning.

either way, you asked a question, i gave a you an answer. now if it does not coincide with what you wanted to hear, i'm sorry but that doesn't mean it still isn't the answer to the question.

the fact of the matter is that sponsors have their rights and abilities. do they sometimes get overlooked. to be honest, yes. is it right? of course not. but it happens.

now in the specific case you are referring to, gabe's access to the charter member forum was removed because he was never supposed to have it in the first place. see he was a charter member before he became a sponsor, as were a few other sponsors, so there access to the forum was not removed when they switched memberships. some sponsors never had access, so it was not an issue for them. i can tell you that the bod did take the situation seriously, just like we don't want to upset our members; we definitely don't want to upset one of our most active sponsors. we had a charter vote and it was decided to allow members to continue selling. period. i'm sorry but you cannot expect the bod to remove selling privileges from our members so that sponsors can take over the selling forums. it won't happen-on any forum. this isn't a personal thing, it is simple logic.

now we did not vote to remove your access from the selling forums, so i am unaware of your issue with that. but i will get an anwer to that asap. also you are not a sponsor, you listed as a charter member. so did you lose access also? or was it just gabe's access?

~alex

[Bill S]

Jason, just so I understand - As a Sponsor, can you not access the "For Sale" forum?

Also, am I correct in understanding that as a Sponsor, you can't access "Charter" forums?

[aggman]

Jason, just so I understand - As a Sponsor, can you not access the "For Sale" forum?

Also, am I correct in understanding that as a Sponsor, you can't access "Charter" forums?


the first one got me wondering as well. i have already posted a message for greenmake to check on the sale forum access. hopefully if their access is blocked, it is fixed when greenmako logs back on.

as for the second, you are correct sponsor's do not have access to the charter members forum.

~alex

[Gseclipse02]

i dont think it is ed "GREATWHITE" post in there

[JTrott]

Jason, just so I understand - As a Sponsor, can you not access the "For Sale" forum?

Gabe(Neptune) cannot access the Charter Member For Sale forum.


Also, am I correct in understanding that as a Sponsor, you can't access "Charter" forums?

Again, Gabe(Neptune) cannot access the Charter Member forums. I guess the Sponsorship fee that he paid did not cover the $25 Charter Member fee.

Jason

[greenmako]

the first one got me wondering as well. i have already posted a message for greenmake to check on the sale forum access. hopefully if their access is blocked, it is fixed when greenmako logs back on.

as for the second, you are correct sponsor's do not have access to the charter members forum.

~alex


checked the permissions: Sponsors have access to all sales area except Charter for sale/Charter Member Forum

[captexas]

Maybe I mis-remember, but I don't remember allowing sponsors the right to vote in the original by-laws that were written when MAAST was first formed. Again, I could be wrong. Seems to me there would be some concern over sponsors having a bit too much influence, especially as there has been such a fuss over coddling the sponsors the past few years. Same reason sponsors and people with commercial interests that can benefit from MAAST shouldn't be allowed to be on the BOD, it's called conflict of interest.

I believe that in the last spat by a certain sponsor or two about the for sale forums, their privelages in the Charter Member discussion forum was stopped because it wasn't appropriate for sponsors to be ranting/pushing their cause there, that if they have an issue it should be taken directly to the BOD. Again, it comes down to is MAAST and this website created for sponsors to rule and do what they want or is it here to be a so called "non-profit organization" that is here to educate and advance this hobby?