Should the BOD and/or MOD Forums be open for READ ONLY to MAAST Charter Members?

[Bill S]

What the title says. I advocated that position a few years ago. Here is/was my reasoning. Each time one or more BODs or MODs get together in their forums and discuss club business, it is technically "a meeting". There are minutes (the notes) of those "meetings", and they should be available to the paid membership to view (a Read Only Forum). Right now the Bylaws say the results of all online forum voting by the BOD is to be posted in the Minutes. I've not seen that so far. This could eliminate that need.

I'm hoping that this thread/poll won't get deleted. But, since I'm the OP, I can make my own rules, right? OK, lets try not to get too personal (me too), and open discussions and thread creep are encouraged.

Here are your choices:

1) Both should be READ ONLY to Charter Members
2) Only MOD should be READ ONLY to Charter Members
3) Only BOD should be READ ONLY to Charter Members
4) No, I don't think anything should be open.

[allan]

I would hate the fact that if I was getting a warning for anything that it would then be open information.

I would hate a discussion involved over the interpretation of something I wrote not being understood because of poor grammar or spelling to be visible anyone other than those trying to figure out whether or not I was inciting or attacking or what ever the case.

I would hate it if I were a sponsor attempting to raise a concern that was now open to both the public and even my competitors.

I would hate the fact that attempting to work in a glass office can be quite bothersome.

I would hate the fact that each and every time I report a post it would be visible to the entire population.

I would hate the fact that members will be less inclined to report a post because their anonymity is gone.

I could probably go on. But the bottom line is that I think it's a foolish suggestion. But at least it came at a time when we have nothing else going on.

[Zack]

I don't believe so. Having been a moderator and a bod, there are many different opinions in both forums reguarding an issue. We debate these issues and come to a polished agreement and release it to the public. We also have contracts with sponsors and members (inb4 posting pms publicly) and if these were readable this would violate the terms (what happened on FB being a different thing completely) which would lead to a seperate private sub forum for messages and basically make this irrelevant as the case could b made that not everything is readable. I'm not sure what angle your getting at with this being posted, but as stated, you do believe there is some corruption in the bod. Why not start a vote of no confidence?

Also, let's say an issue happened with user x and certain mods disagree and certain mods agree with an action. If his is public, there could be potential backlash for a specific mod. Just my .02 not related to any other bods

[FireWater]

Bill, I like ya. However I do not feel as if this is a great idea at all. Several good points have been made by Allan and Zack. With anonymity gone in the MOD area what would be the point of having it?

[Zack]

Furthermore, meeting defined as :

Meeting: an assembly of people, esp. the members of a society or committee, for discussion or entertainment.

Assembly: a group of people gathered together in one place for a common purpose.

I'd also argue that since bod meetings have never been held online (as far as I know), these definitions would be relative to our de facto situation that meetings are held quarterly and in person, thus making the basis of your argument invalid.

per bylaws:

g. The right to attend and observe Board meetings.

attend defined as : be present at (an event, meeting, or function).

present defined as: of a person in a particular place. The and making it so you can't have one without the other. And I completely agree with what allan listed above.

[Bill S]

I'd also argue that since bod meetings have never been held online (as far as I know), these definitions would be relative to our de facto situation that meetings are held quarterly and in person, thus making the basis of your argument invalid..

As you are a member of the BOD, you might want to take a gander at the Bylaws again. If you are going to use them in a statement of position, you should at least be correct. Y'all DO realize that the Bylaws REQUIRE you (the BOD) to post the results of each and every vote you take in your Double Secret Probation Forum in the Club Minutes, right?

ARTICLE IV – MEETINGS

Section 3. Conducting Business By Forum Vote

Paragraph 1. Notice of an agenda item must be posted in the Directors Forum or appropriate Membership Forum by a member of the Board of Directors and remain open for discussion for:

a. A period of no less than 5 days for Membership or,
b. A period of no less than 2 days for Board of Directors

Paragraph 2. Upon closure by expiration of the agenda item discussion, a motion for either further discussion or a vote will be made.

Paragraph 3. Voting shall begin only after notice of the agenda item has been been provided a full discussion. The voting period shall remain open for:

a. A period of no less than 5 days for Membership
b. A period of no less than 1 day for Board of Directors

Paragraph 4. Quorum and Majority Vote results shall be determined upon expiration of the agenda item vote. Quorum and majority shall consist of:

a. Not less than one-fifth (1/5) of all the voting membership with a simple majority vote or,
b. Not less than two-thirds (2/3) of all the Board of Directors with a seventy-five percent majority of the yes/no votes.

Paragraph 5. Votes will be certified only upon expiration of the poll with the quorum count and final poll results being stated. Results and effective date of certified vote will be added to the meeting minutes at the next scheduled meeting.

[Mr Cob]

As a sponsor and club member I'm against an open read only front office...for all the reasons listed above and there are plenty more.

If there is reason to suspect ill activity behind the scenes then I think the proper protocol word be for the membership to select a person or two to audit the threads etc in the front office and relay that information to the membership in a formal format which would not disclose personal information of sponsors and members.

Not sure of how that would be done but Jason did mention in another thread about there being a reference in the bylaws that anyone can request temporary access to the front office.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[Zack]

I'm still not seeing where the discussion has to be posted leading up to a vote. Furthermore I'd argue that final poll results meaning if the yays or nays have it. Since these are under the veil of meetings I'd still argue that meetings would be defined as in person.

[Zack]

And in reguard to votes being published, it's been a little hectic lately, so the posting of minutes isn't exactly top priority (although I assure you they are being worked on.) like Allan said in another thread, there's not a timetable for these being posted I.e have these posted one week after meeting, but rest assured everything is slowly but surely getting taken care of. The last meeting was 10 days ago bill

[ramsey]

"Results and effective date of certified vote will be added to the meeting minutes at the next scheduled meeting."

This is very different than what you're trying to advocate here. Results are the outcome of some work, not documentation of all the work leading up to it.

[Big_Pun]

And in reguard to votes being published, it's been a little hectic lately, so the posting of minutes isn't exactly top priority (although I assure you they are being worked on.) like Allan said in another thread, there's not a timetable for these being posted, but rest assured everything is slowly but surely getting taken care of

can't wait to see these votes

[Bill S]

Zach, you would come across better if you would take 5 minutes, and actually READ the Bylaws. The above section of of the Bylaws that I posed is titled "Conducting Business by Forum Vote" is the ONLY section of the Bylaws that is under the section of "Meetings". In other words, the Bylaws DEFINE the business in the BOD Forums as "Meetings". And, there IS a timetable, and I'd gather that prior votes were missed? If I go through the published "Minutes" in the Forum where they are supposed to be, there is NOTHING about the "Business" that was conducted in the Forum. The Bylaws aren't "guidelines", they are there for a purpose. The primary purpose of the "Meetings" section of the Bylaws was to keep the business of MAAST from being so private.

So, at a minimum, the minutes need to state the subject of each Vote, and then the results of the Vote. As a Charter Member, I'm entitled to know how each BOD voted. If it's unanimous, feel free to state that. But since I'm not "invited" to these "Meetings", I should be entitled to a know what was voted on, how y'all voted. It's what the BYLAWS SAY.

P.S. Personally, I can buy the MODs Forum being private, with oversight from the BOD. I can't buy not being able to see what our elected representatives are doing in the background. Hidden garbage is what historically has caused problems with MAAST. What are you folks afraid of?

[Zack]

Maybe I missed something in the past, but are you banned from bod meetings? As a charter you can certainly attend per by laws, yet in the past two meetings I haven't even seen a request or even seen you post. Like Ramsey said, if you want the result a poll that's fine, but asking for individual votes and discussion is another thing. Not sure when the next meeting is but I believe it was the one I signed up to host then by all means come, I'll even have a cold beer waiting for you. And I think the real question is what are you accusing us of?

[allan]

I don't think they're afraid, bill. I just think they're a little tired of being lambasted for the last few days. I know I am. It's been non stop for what, three days now?

One thing after another, I can't wait to see what you cook up next. But, at least some of the membership are actually still talking reefs and fish and not embroiled in this battle of wit.

Good night all, I will catch up in the morning. Or maybe I will go for a run. Either way, it used to be a freakin fish club.

[Bill S]

Yes, it USED to be an "open" freakin' fish club.

Y'all can keep throwing the "can we get back to fish and corals" comments, but this IS a CLUB, and this CLUB has rules. You can keep harping on it - but the fact of the matter is, you (the BOD and MODS) need to stop what you are doing, READ the Bylaws, and decide you are going to obey them. THEN we can get back to fish and corals.

They have been blatantly ignored, obviously. We have a Board Member posting above that doesn't even realize that the discussions they have in their "secret" Forum that have votes HAVE to be disclosed in the "Minutes" that are published. As far as I can see, this quite obvious rule has been ignored, and now that it's been brought up, all of a sudden it appears as though some folks who thought their vote was secret, are a bit worried - at least that's how it looks to all of us peons.

So, BOD. How about you at least do what the Bylaws say, and PUBLISH THE RESULTS OF YOUR VOTING. It's not an option in the Bylaws.

[Bill S]

Maybe I missed something in the past, but are you banned from bod meetings?

No, I'm not banned. But... Tell me if I'm wrong. I can't find a single instance of the publication of an announcement for a Board Meeting in 2014. I looked at the MAAST Calendar (now I know who has a birthday this month!), and at the Announcements Forum.

So... I guess MAAST Charter Members are invited, but since they don't know when or where they are... How are we supposed to attend?

[Zack]

If you're implying I'm worried about or results going public you are in fact incorrect.

Edit: furthermore, I'm not the individual in charge of the minute releases or writing them.

2nd Edit: I'll give you that, like I said, I'm hosting the next one (if it's the fall meeting) and would be more than happy to have you there.

[allan]

I don't know, bill. It just seems that with all the yelling and posts, that you're a bit upset. Eve will probably be better able to answer your questions about the minutes containing the votes that you're after, for this year anyway. She is very good at tracking that. Not sure if we held any "secret" votes last year.

So basically put, you're concerned about the bod announcing meetings and votes. I must have misconstrued the purpose of this vote then, because it seems to me that you're after making the bod and mod area open (read only) to charter membership. I did some searching, not much, but a some, I couldn't find any forum out there that has an open bod or mod area.

I do find it ironic that you're telling me/us to stop "harping" about various aspects of your tirade, but that's all it seems that you're doing. So, if it's permissible for you, surely it can be for us as well, correct?

I admit, yesterday I was getting angry or upset. Today, I'm just bored.

[Dean]

As a general statement, NOT directed towards any person on this forum. The doors on the front office should remain closed. If you want to know the specifics behind decisions made behind those doors then nominate yourself for one of those positions when there is an opening or re-election.

I am going to be glad when all of this mess is resolved and allowed to settle.

[koa25]

As a general statement, NOT directed towards any person on this forum. The doors on the front office should remain closed. If you want to know the specifics behind decisions made behind those doors then nominate yourself for one of those positions when there is an opening or re-election.

I am going to be glad when all of this mess is resolved and allowed to settle.

+1

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk