Jun 28, 2010, 9:46 PM
Post #28 of 140
(1234 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fasted3] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Hi fasted,
Quote:
I think online voting is a good idea
And
Quote:
The proxy does not appear to be a blank check,
I think online voting is a great idea.
I also think that the way this 'proxy goodie' is worded does not restrict any proxy that the BOD would have their grubby little hands on.
If I were convinced that the proxy could, under no conditions, be used for anything other than online voting I would vote for it. I am NOT convinced.
For many years I belonged to EAA and every voting year Tom P would ask for proxies from anyone stupid enough to give it to him; and an awful lot of the membership did. He runs the EAA as his own little fifedom.
IMO the BOD does not listen to the membership and people like BJ Worth have been using their position(s) on the BOD for their own benefit for way too long. He is one I would like to see go.
And his audacity in coming to this forum and asking for help. Good grief!!!!!!
Jun 28, 2010, 10:05 PM
Post #29 of 140
(1232 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
Predictions are that it will be expensive
It cant be as expensive as including printed paper mailers out within Parachutist Magazine (the price of printing it in the 2-3 months I've seen it included alone should cover the cost of programming a solution).
Not including the staff hours it takes to go through those paper mailers. And those staffers are STILL doing data entry into a 'database' (or should be) to keep track of any 'yes' or 'no' votes, and with what oversight to that staffer and his/her preconceived notions of how the vote should sway?
So far, paper inclusions = $$, staff hrs to count paper = $$, waste of paper (your trash and USPA's) = $$, cost of filing legitimate votes = $$, oversight of staffer doing the counting (if this is even taking place) = $$, cost on environment =$$
Why not take some up-front cost of automation and realize a long-term benefit of an un-biased software solution that should at least cover even the cost of paper and man-hrs in just a few years? (this is based purely on my speculation on how USPA handles votes currently, which may be completely off base)
Worst case scenario... Let's just say that they incorporate online voting. USPA will incur some cost upfront for programming and the on-going cost to continue to print mailings, albeit possibly scaled down in regard to print. As long as 75% of membership utilizes the online voting the cost offset between printing/having dedicated man-hours to counting votes vs. software counting should offset the cost margin in the long run.
This is mostly at minimum wage (Ohio min. wage)... and my bet is on someone NOT earning min. wage and earning a hefty salary counting these votes when they could be doing something entirely more productive with their time.. with my membership money.
Although if only 10 pieces of paper get mailed back in, the counting job isn't as hard as I may be thinking.
Jun 29, 2010, 5:59 AM
Post #30 of 140
(1215 views)
Shortcut
Re: [apt3studiodiver] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
Predictions are that it will be expensive
It cant be as expensive as including printed paper mailers out within Parachutist Magazine (the price of printing it in the 2-3 months I've seen it included alone should cover the cost of programming a solution).
As it has been described, all the costs of online voting are in addition to the costs of the existing paper balloting.
As it has been described, the online votes are converted into paper ballots and merged with the other paper ballots.
At that point, the existing system operates as it always has.
If USPA wants to design and implement a system that will replace the current system at a reduced cost, I'll be happy to go along.
That is not what is in the "plan" now.
If you think that's what you'll get by sending in a "yes" proxy, you are mistaken.
Jun 29, 2010, 11:01 AM
Post #34 of 140
(1177 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
IMO the BOD does not listen to the membership and people like BJ Worth have been using their position(s) on the BOD for their own benefit for way too long. He is one I would like to see go.
Jun 29, 2010, 12:29 PM
Post #35 of 140
(1164 views)
Shortcut
Re: [apt3studiodiver] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
Predictions are that it will be expensive
It cant be as expensive as including printed paper mailers out within Parachutist Magazine (the price of printing it in the 2-3 months I've seen it included alone should cover the cost of programming a solution).
Estimates for the online voting are 15 to 20 thousand. The current paper balloting costs about 8 thousand. One of the things that can make online voting MUCH cheaper is to be charged for the number of people that actually use it, as opposed to the entire membership roster. This would work as an opt-in type registration for voting. However, it does require some technical changes on the USPA side (that would cost about two days of work). I have personally informed the BOD of this several times at BOD meetings, including the last one.
One great advantage of having an opt-in online voting system is that it is more secure than the 'give the membership roster to the vendor' method is that security and fraud are significantly reduced.
An optin system works like this:
1. Member goes to USPA's website and identifies/validates who they are. An important security issue is that the email addy that USPA has on file be used. IOW, you cannot change your email addy during the registration process.
2. The USPA site generates a passcode/confirmation number that is emailed to the member and to the online voting vendor. The passcode is not stored by USPA.
3. The member goes to the online voting vendor's site and enters the passcode/email combination to validate the member.
4. The member then votes.
The advantages of this are that only the vendor and the member know what the passcode is.
A disadvantage of this is that members with the same email address will have to get additional email addys and then update USPA's info first, before being able to vote. IOW, email addys have to be unique within the member DB. One thing that USPA needs to do is verify an email addy change via the old email addy before changing the email addy. USPA does not do this. IOW, anyone can create a new email addy on yahoo, for instance, send an email in to USPA and change any other member's email addy. A person could cull votes by systematically changing other people's email addys and then going to the optin site. This may be avoided if USPA diligently verified email change requests by polling the old email addy to verify a valid email change request.
A side note: The maintenance of the USPA members' email addy is non-existent. Clint Vincent told me personally that he does not receive bounce messages that would enable him to remove bounced email or change forwarded emails in the USPA DB. Yet another concern is the transfer of email addys via dormancy and later pickup by someone else. IOW, suppose someone used skydiver@yahoo.com and told USPA that was their email addy. Then they never used it for years. That account gets put back into circulation and could get picked up by someone else. So someone could potentially have their own email under their own name in the USPA DB and an account to another member under a recirculated email addy.
In the method proposed to be used by USPA the entire membership DB will be handed over to the vendor and the vendor will take care of validating a member based solely on the information that USPA has. USPA BOD members, specifically Ed Dixon, have told me that they plan to use something like your birthday as a passcode. Think about this. How many places can you find someone's birthday, including the year? Facebook, dropzone.com, third party web sites, DZOs, organizers of FAI records, competition files, 411 type lookup sites, and on and on. Even if the USPA member number was used as a passcode, that is still available in a large number of places and available to a large number of people. It's on your mailing label, in minutes, on third party web sites etc. IOW, it is known to more people than only the online voting vendor and the member. The door should be shut on this. The passcode should only be known by the vendor and the member.
The advantage of the USPA method is that USPA does not have to do anything.
The disadvantages of the USPA method include and are not limited to:
1. Member data that USPA has is known to a large number of people. This includes and is not limited to DZOs, organizers, facebook, dropzone.com, 411 & other lookup people sites, third party web sites and real-life friends and friends of friends.
2. As of today, member data, specifically the email addy, can be changed by anyone anywhere by sending an email to USPA. There are no checks in place to validate such a change. To test this, I suggest you try to change my email of record with USPA. Go get a yahoo, hotmail or gmail email account. Send an email to USPA HQ with my old email addy and say that my new email addy is whatever you created. There will be no validation email sent to me confirming this change. Anyone can take over my online vote.
I have informed USPA about these security issues and many more, too numerous to list here, several times in person at BOD meetings. The response was that 'well, no one will do that' That is not the point. The point is that the door on compromise and fraud should be shut and locked, so that there is no question about the validity of an online vote.
USPA fails to meet this concern.
A note about the way USPA is going about this change:
Proxy voting is NOT allowed by Robert's Rules because it removes the fundamental rights of members debating and voting on issues. However, the bylaws may allow proxy voting, as long as the local, state and federal laws do not prohibit proxy voting.
Proxy voting is acceptable in organizations were the members have transferable rights or privileges, such as stock in a company. USPA members do not have any transferable privileges. Your membership cannot be given to another. IOW, if you go in, you cannot will the balance of your membership time to someone else.
Proxy voting removes the fundamental rights of members to debate and vote on issues.
The proper way USPA should be getting support for online voting is to put a measure on the ballot and have it voted on directly by the membership. They should state the exact changes eg Amend section abc by deleting 'blah, blah, blah' and inserting 'yadda, yadda, yadda' etc.
The fact that USPA cannot provide this information, (and I have asked for it several times) shows that USPA does not understand the bylaws change process, is flippant, disregards proper procedures and discounts members' ability to comprehend issues, as noted by Ed Dixon's comment of: "It was decided to keep things simple so members would not have to pull out the Governance Manual and study it to find out what was being proposed. "
If you have sent in a proxy, you may revoke it at any time.
.
(This post was edited by MakeItHappen on Jun 29, 2010, 12:44 PM)
Jun 29, 2010, 7:08 PM
Post #36 of 140
(1126 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
If you have sent in a proxy, you may revoke it at any time.
Since they ain't valid in the first place.....
Quote:
The proper way USPA should be getting support for online voting is to put a measure on the ballot and have it voted on directly by the membership. They should state the exact changes eg Amend section abc by deleting 'blah, blah, blah' and inserting 'yadda, yadda, yadda' etc.
As many times as this has been stated it impresses me how it has not been considered by the BOD as an option. The effort to do so is less than is taking for this proxy effort since we a ballot needs to be done anyway.
Jun 29, 2010, 11:38 PM
Post #37 of 140
(1108 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
If you have sent in a proxy, you may revoke it at any time.
Since they ain't valid in the first place.....
The proxy is valid. The USPA bylaws allow proxies and it is not against local, state or federal laws.
In reply to:
Quote:
The proper way USPA should be getting support for online voting is to put a measure on the ballot and have it voted on directly by the membership. They should state the exact changes eg Amend section abc by deleting 'blah, blah, blah' and inserting 'yadda, yadda, yadda' etc.
As many times as this has been stated it impresses me how it has not been considered by the BOD as an option. The effort to do so is less than is taking for this proxy effort since we a ballot needs to be done anyway.
Perhaps this may be an action that comes out of the summer meeting.
Jun 30, 2010, 1:09 AM
Post #38 of 140
(1103 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
I think online voting is a great idea.
I also think that the way this 'proxy goodie' is worded does not restrict any proxy that the BOD would have their grubby little hands on.
If I were convinced that the proxy could, under no conditions, be used for anything other than online voting I would vote for it. I am NOT convinced.
For many years I belonged to EAA and every voting year Tom P would ask for proxies from anyone stupid enough to give it to him; and an awful lot of the membership did. He runs the EAA as his own little fifedom.
IMO the BOD does not listen to the membership and people like BJ Worth have been using their position(s) on the BOD for their own benefit for way too long. He is one I would like to see go.
And his audacity in coming to this forum and asking for help. Good grief!!!!!!
Anything else you would like to know?
JerryBaumchen
Hi Jerry,
Long time no see !! You say the Board does not listen, but you have at least 3 of us right here listening (reading). I respect those who have a different view from mine. I can tell you that the proxy is exactly what it says it is, for online voting only.
So, are you pleased with our present system, which is as flawed as it can get? Are you satisfied that the Executive Director (who is hired by the board) and staff count the votes at present? I am not. With online voting, ALL votes will be counted by a third party and that is something we should have done a looooong time ago.
It's not that anyone thinks the members aren't smart enough to read and understand a proxy with a lot of detail. It's just that they don't have the time/interest and most won't do it. In my opinion a detailed proxy would have been doomed from the start and that is why I argued to keep it simple.
We are not there yet and it will take an effort on the part of those who see a benefit in this effort, so please send in proxies.
Oh yes, once again, BJ did not come here and ask for anything. That is a post by someone else of an email they received.
Jun 30, 2010, 7:30 AM
Post #39 of 140
(1087 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
Proxy voting is acceptable in organizations were the members have transferable rights or privileges, such as stock in a company. USPA members do not have any transferable privileges. Your membership cannot be given to another. IOW, if you go in, you cannot will the balance of your membership time to someone else.
I may have interpreted this statement incorrectly.
Jun 30, 2010, 1:46 PM
Post #40 of 140
(1062 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Hi Jan,
That post is so lengthy and filled with incorrect information that I stopped reading long before I got to the end. If you have positive suggestions on real issues, please give them to me and they will be considered.
But first, we have to get more proxies or it is a moot point !! So, keep 'em coming folks !!
Jun 30, 2010, 2:09 PM
Post #41 of 140
(1063 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EDYDO] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Hi Jan,
That post is so lengthy and filled with incorrect information that I stopped reading long before I got to the end. If you have positive suggestions on real issues, please give them to me and they will be considered.
But first, we have to get more proxies or it is a moot point !! So, keep 'em coming folks !!
Blue Skies,
Ed
Yes John DeSantis called me and said the cost was $35 thousand. I thought it was 15-20 k. Other than that it is correct.
Jun 30, 2010, 3:52 PM
Post #42 of 140
(1048 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Jan, I am certain I posted this before. The base price of the plan under consideration is $14,995 and we get unlimited elections for one year for whatever purpose needed. There are extras if we choose to purchase them such as entering paper ballots into the system. My thoughts are that this will cost less than $20 k per election. That is less than the price of a postage stamp per member per year to put it in perspective.
Many of the things you state as fact and complain about haven't even been settled yet. We are seeking the best solutions. That is the reason I ask for constructive information.
I recall something I saw hanging in a business. "Arguing with some people is like wrestling with a pig in the mud. Sooner or later you are going to realize it is what the pig enjoys." So, I am going to let you continue with all of your "facts", undisturbed.
Jun 30, 2010, 4:43 PM
Post #43 of 140
(1033 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Everyone, BJ did not ask me to post his message on dropzone.com .... It was something that I decided to do, as regardless of which side you are on about BJ, I agree about the benefits of online voting.
Buddy, I don't care if you like/hate BJ, but I think online voting deserves serious consideration.
In reply to:
As it has been described, all the costs of online voting are in addition to the costs of the existing paper balloting.
Yes, but the grand total is not necessarily more expensive than paper ballot only.
Extra expense may have been true in the web1.0 era and the dot.bomb era, but this is not necessarily unamiously true anymore, depending on how it's done.
It will not be more expensive, IFF, the cost of implementing an online voting system, amortized over the next X years (say 3), is less than the cost of the extra paper ballots that would disappear when people use online voting instead (and the cost savings caused by automatic vote counting for the electronic portion of the vote) AND/OR the increased voting percentage causes benefits that outweigh the cost of online vote.
Today's it is cheap/free to do maps, blogs, petition. EXAMPLE... You want to create a petition?..... www.petitiononline.com You want to embed video in a webpage?.... www.youtube.com You want to embed a blog in a webpage?... www.twitter.com You want to embed a map in a webpage?... maps.google.com etc...
Now... you want an online voting system? Google "online voting engine" and USPA just buys one of them (an appropriate one, carefully). Some of them are even very secure, and with minimal cost, can be integrated into an identity verification system (often, this feature, is now included for free, in some of these voting engines). One technique used is a unique key system (generate a new passcode for each USPA member), with an optional audit trail to help prevent abuses, and undo votes that are fraudulent. Some of these online voting systems include that feature. Some system would even allow every USPA member can verify their vote by re-entering the special passcode. This is non-USPA software that USPA can't hack or distort, thus making voting, in theory, safer (in some ways) than paper ballots, at least in theory. In my opinion, it's safe enough nowadays for this league of voting.
In the past, in the web1.0 era, you had to write a lot of computer code (scripting) and HTML, to get complex stuff done. Nowadays, there's already websites that provide generic online voting engines for sporting assoications. USPA would simply pay a pretty low fee to use one of those web2.0 voting services.
I CHECKED some of the prices, and they ARE cheaper than mailing out extra votes. Buddies, this is web2.0 going to web3.0 and the era of high dot.bomb costs aren't necessarily here, if you don't try to reinvent the wheels. The voting engine wheel is already reinvented by many people (with lots of competition as you can see)
(This post was edited by mdrejhon on Jun 30, 2010, 4:56 PM)
Jun 30, 2010, 4:49 PM
Post #44 of 140
(1028 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
As it has been described, the online votes are converted into paper ballots and merged with the other paper ballots.
At that point, the existing system operates as it always has.
Paul,
No no no no no !!! If online voting passes, USPA will have a 100% online voting system with paper ballots allowed. The paper ballots will have to be keyed in by someone, so everyone may as well do it themselves.
Staff will do no counting of ballots with online voting which is as it should be.
Jun 30, 2010, 5:04 PM
Post #45 of 140
(1019 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EDYDO] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
As it has been described, the online votes are converted into paper ballots and merged with the other paper ballots.
At that point, the existing system operates as it always has.
Paul,
No no no no no !!! If online voting passes, USPA will have a 100% online voting system with paper ballots allowed. The paper ballots will have to be keyed in by someone, so everyone may as well do it themselves.
Staff will do no counting of ballots with online voting which is as it should be.
Blue Skies,
Ed
Well, that's interesting.
I tried to find the thread that I believe had this information, but was unable. The thread that this post is on is almost brand new. Any idea where the earlier thread went? FYI This current thread started on Jun 25 2010. We've been discussing this stuff for a lot longer than that.
Anyway, somewhere in that earlier discussion, I got the idea that the online system was going to feed into the existing paper system.
Was that the plan at some point and it has changed?
Because you know I have been reading and posting all along, and it seems to me that this is the first I have heard you say that online voting is a complete and separate system, and that the paper ballots feed into the online system, not the other way around.
Jun 30, 2010, 5:23 PM
Post #46 of 140
(1016 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Paul,
I have no idea what happened to the first thread. The information you have did not come from me. It is not and never was the plan.
I have been sticking around trying to clear up misconceptions. Most things I let pass without comment, but major ones I have addressed. The system proposed is 100% online. Paper is allowed. That is at the heart of the proposed system.
The wording from N&E of the proposed changes in the Governance manual goes out to the board tomorrow. I will share it just after the full board gets it. It is intended to be worded in such a way that if online voting does not work as expected, the board can go back to what we presently have.
Jun 30, 2010, 6:16 PM
Post #47 of 140
(998 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EDYDO] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Ed, I'll preface this by saying you ARE one of those I trust on the BOD, but to easily something seems to be started with good intentions only to have those more self serving snowball it into something ugly. You and I both know much meeting business is done in the hallways, and behind closed doors, so there in lies the problem I have with this proxy.
I am all for moving voting into the modern day, BUT it must be done securely (which so far is not a guarantee) to avoid the constant bickering about the fairness of elections. It must be done so as to minimize the economic impact to the organization.
No one will disclose the current cost of elections to the members. Now the vague numbers between $15,000 and $35,000 are leaking out, and that so far is in ADDITION to the current costs. No one had shown a plan where this online cost will be a replacement to the current paper costs.
It doesn't matter if it's less than a stamp per member, the organization isn't spending that stamp now.
The way this should have gone down: EVERY one of these details should have been ironed out and disclosed to the voting membership PRIOR to asking for a proxy. The difficulty is the portion of the BOD that doesn't really want to work for the good of the membership, but rather their own ends. Now your second chance at this (at very minor cost) will be to add an item to the ballot this year.
Jun 30, 2010, 6:39 PM
Post #49 of 140
(993 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Hi fasted,
Quote:
I think online voting is a good idea
And
Quote:
The proxy does not appear to be a blank check,
I think online voting is a great idea.
I also think that the way this 'proxy goodie' is worded does not restrict any proxy that the BOD would have their grubby little hands on.
If I were convinced that the proxy could, under no conditions, be used for anything other than online voting I would vote for it. I am NOT convinced.
For many years I belonged to EAA and every voting year Tom P would ask for proxies from anyone stupid enough to give it to him; and an awful lot of the membership did. He runs the EAA as his own little fifedom.
IMO the BOD does not listen to the membership and people like BJ Worth have been using their position(s) on the BOD for their own benefit for way too long. He is one I would like to see go.
And his audacity in coming to this forum and asking for help. Good grief!!!!!!
Anything else you would like to know?
JerryBaumchen
+1
And here's something everyone ought to know: BJ & Co. have on this issue already apparently tried to scam not only the members but their BOD colleagues as well.
Here is an excerpt from an article I wrote for the April 2008 issue of SKYDIVING about the February 2008 BOD meeting, wherein the apparent scam they tried came to light.
The article was headlined "Personalities, Difficult Subjects Hamper USPA Meeting" and it began on page 22.
BEGIN EXCERPT: The genesis of the elections dustup starts at a previous board meeting, where during the final Sunday morning committee reports BJ proposed a “trust me” motion for what was specifically identified as a “housekeeping” action; non-policy-related changes to the organization’s governing manual. Each proposed change was shown on the overhead projector screens to the full board, including one that said something like “from now on, only the original ballot that comes with each member’s election issue of Parachutist will be valid.”
This was not a housekeeping item; this was a policy change. More importantly, it was a policy change that outlawed a long-practiced election tactic: director candidates carrying photocopies of a blank ballot around the drop zone, encouraging people to vote on the spot with one of the photocopied ballots.
The practice was not only approved but encouraged because of USPA’s 30,000-some members, no more than ten percent actually vote in the elections – a significant fraction on photocopied ballots furnished by director candidates.
The problem with this method is that some overenthusiastic candidates pre-mark the ballots with their own names and/or those of their preferred “slate” of candidates (you can vote for up to eight national directors plus one regional director candidate). Then they photocopy them and hand them… or they have a member sign a blank ballot that then shows up at USPA headquarters with selections marked in different ink.
There are other irregularities that periodically pop up too, and so, in the interests of cleaner results and greater participation, the board decided some time ago that, for the 2008 election, members could choose to vote online or only on the ballot that came with their association magazine.
The conversion process, however, turned out to be longer and more expensive than expected and so there was no way within the available timeframe and budget to make online voting happen in 2008.
So the board decided to stay with paper this election cycle and then somewhere along the line, either in committee or in the recesses of Larry (Bagley’s) mind, it was decided to at least clean up the paper process by getting rid of the problematical photocopied ballots because they were going to do that when they went online anyway.
Unfortunately, this was another idea that seemed to be a good one at the time – and it got worse from there.
First, it was buried among 50-some other minor tweaks in the governance manual that had been called “housekeeping” changes. As such, it was overlooked in the rush to deal with more important business – all when everyone was sick of looking at each other and mostly either looking at their watches or already on their way out the door.
Second, it was fundamentally unnecessary because, while it was a little messy, it had worked fine and there was no reason to change it for only one election cycle.
Finally, getting rid of photocopies but not going online was likely to result in an even smaller voter turnout – maybe as low as one or two percent.
So while there was indeed discussion and most likely an actual vote to accept the motion and all of the “housekeeping” changes, many board members didn’t realize what they’d done until they got to Orlando (in February 2008).
Consequently, things got stormy again because it seemed as if BJ and Larry, in assumed collusion with Glenn, of course, tried to slide one by the board and the membership to further their private agendas.
It got to the point where even the smooth and usually unflappable BJ started barking about the merciless pounding they were all taking from online and other… personalities who are just as certain as their elected representatives that they are absolutely right about everything all the time.
Even Larry started complaining. And Larry -- who, before becoming an employee of the association, served on its board and as its president for multiple terms -- has heard it all so many times before that such abuse normally rolls off his back like water off a duck.
But this time some of it stuck, especially because Larry was on the hot seat for demanding changes based on conditions for which he had no proof (the suspect ballots were destroyed by rule after a previous meeting) meaning another secret was in play.
So Larry barked too and soon there were more denunciations and calls to quit directed at him, BJ and Glenn, calls for Jan to be made USPA president, for all the bums to be thrown out so a new generation could do a better job.
The storm has not yet dissipated, either. The photocopy ballot prohibition was not repealed at the February board meeting, so efforts are now afoot by disapproving board members and rank-and-file members alike to make sure it’s repealed at the next board meeting. END EXCERPT
Jun 30, 2010, 7:11 PM
Post #50 of 140
(989 views)
Shortcut
Re: [robinheid] USPA Members: Please vote for online voting (USPA link) -- online voting plan may be cancelled
[In reply to]
Can't Post
That looks pretty accurate except that it is past history.
It is best saved for election time. Members wanted change in '08 and they got it. Glen is not President, BJ no longer Chairs N&E and Larry Bagley is no longer an advisor to N&E. The problems you mention are, in my opinion, resolved, for now. You got your change so give those of us who are trying to overcome things you mention a break. You are forgetting a major force in the change.....Jay Stokes. He can be trusted.
Blue Skies,
Ed
Edited to add: I speak for myself as a USPA member and for no one else, certainly not the association.
(This post was edited by EDYDO on Jun 30, 2010, 7:26 PM)
