BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2005-10 > 1129304195


From: "Mike St. Clair/ST" <>
Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] SOPs - Permission to Speak
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 09:36:35 -0600
In-Reply-To: <002701c5d0d3$c9676300$2f90e718@jancortez>


I think Jan is right. Even though future ABs can decide whether to continue
or to change the procedure, we should adopt procedures that can work now and
in the future.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Cortez [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 9:26 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] SOPs - Permission to Speak

Linda,

It appears to me from what you are saying that we should draft this solely
on what we feel or do not feel that *you* would do. Personally, I don't
think that this should have anything to do with it. This is not personal
but, an SOP.

Why not draft this right from the git-go to work with this AB and those in
the future? Seems the way to go in my opinion - so once in place it
wouldn't have to be changed by future AB's based on how they do or not feel
towards the NC.

Just my two cents worth.

Jan


----- Original Message -----
From: "Linda Haas Davenport"

>I think we've forgotten that SOPs are only good for this ABs term. What
>the next NC may or may not do should not enter into formulating a
>standard operating procedure for this AB. Any SOP saying what the NC
>can or cannot do governs only what I, Linda Davenport, as NC can or
>cannot do between now and Aug 31, 2006.
>
> If the majority of you believe I, Linda Davenport as NC, will be
> unfair, treat you all badly, or moderate one of you at a whim then you
> need to come up with a SOP that spells out what I can or can't do. If
> on the other hand the majority of you believe that I, Linda Davenport
> as NC, will treat each of you fairly and will only moderate a person
> in extreme circumstances, then come up with an SOP that reflects that.
> SOPs are not set in concrete, they can be changed whenever they need to be
changed.
>
> We've spent a lot of time on this. Let's get an SOP posted that
> everyone can live with and move on.
>
> Linda Haas Davenport
> NC USGenWeb Project
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike St. Clair/ST" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:05 PM
> Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] SOPs - Permission to Speak
>
>
>> In an "in person" board meeting, the chair has the responsibility and
>> right
>> to recognize someone before they speak. This SOP is dropping that
>> requirement, which doesn't work very well anyway in a mailing list
>> environment. The way I read it, the SOP says the NC may require such
>> recognition before speaking if someone is disruptive, which I presume
>> would be through moderation and the forwarding non-disruptive
>> messages. I believe that our current NC would be evenhanded about
>> such matters, but in the hands of an unreasonable NC this could in
>> effect muzzle the board member indefinitely. I'd feel much better
>> about it if there were provisions for some majority of the board to
>> override that decision. And I suggest possibly considering a
>> duration for such moderation (e.g. "for a period not to exceed 1
>> week" or something like that).
>>
>> Mike St. Clair
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Angie Rayfield [mailto:]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 5:58 AM
>> To:
>> Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] SOPs - Permission to Speak
>>
>> This still does not recognize the right of the moderated member to
>> protest, the requirement to bring it to a vote if so protested, and
>> the right of the board to overrule the Chair. It removes the checks
>> and balances that should be in place.
>>
>> It establishes a dictatorship where one person decides who will and
>> will not speak. As we've seen in the past, that is a power just
>> begging to be abused.
>>
>> Angie Rayfield
>> SEMA SC Representative
>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Linda Haas Davenport [mailto:]
>>>Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 6:45 AM
>>>To:
>>>Subject: [BOARD-L] SOPs - Permission to Speak
>>>
>>>
>>>To incorporate the changes requested by the members the proposed SOP
>>>for Permission to Speak has been changed as follows:
>>>
>>>Any discussion?
>>>
>>>Permission to Speak
>>>
>>>The requirement for recognition by the Chair before speaking is
>>>suspended.
>>>However, the Chair may limit this blanket permission when a member
>>>has demonstrated that he/she is making posts so disruptive that the
>>>board is unable to perform its assigned duties.
>>>
>>>
>>>Linda Haas Davenport
>>>NC USGenWeb Project
>>
>>
>> ==== BOARD Mailing List ====
>> Standing Procedures for the Advisory Board are located at:
>> http://www.usgenweb.org/volunteers/procedures.shtml
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ==== BOARD Mailing List ====
> Standing Procedures for the Advisory Board are located at:
> http://www.usgenweb.org/volunteers/procedures.shtml
>


==== BOARD Mailing List ====
Board-L minutes and voting records are located at:
http://www.usgenweb.org/business/index.shtml



This thread: