BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2001-04 > 0987626377


From: "Teri Pettit" <>
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] BYLAWS AMENDMENT
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 13:39:37 -0700


Here's another idea that just occurred to me.

One downside of eliminating all Special Project seats is that
it reduces the size of the Advisory Board. Within reasonable
limits, a bigger Board is generally better. Smaller bodies
have a higher risk of not being a representative sample of
the whole. Smaller bodies increase the perception of isolation
and eliteness that we already suffer from. Smaller bodies are
more highly impacted by resignations. And with a Board any
smaller than we already have, the size of a clique that
is able to block a 2/3 majority vote gets alarmingly small.

So, how about removing all Special Project seats except the
Archives seat (which I think is fair to keep because there
are hundreds of Archives File Managers and a pretty lot of
them do not hold any other position), and then INCREASING
the number of Representative at Large seats from 1 to 3 or
even 4?

The total size of the Board would stay the same. And the
regional structure is very artificial anyway. Do people
in the northeast really have different interests than
people in the southwest when it comes to USGenWeb policies?
I doubt it.

So this is another option to poll the membership on.

-- Teri

This thread: