IIUG Board Nominations
Not a technical thread: a member questioned why the IIUG board appeared to cap the number of nominees for board elections, since nothing on the IIUG site mentioned a limit, suggesting it could allow candidates to be hand-picked or accepted first-come-first-served, and noting someone's nomination had already been turned away. Another poster echoed the question, and a former board member said all nominations used to be accepted but a qualification screen was added after elected members failed to participate; he also argued for term limits and published meeting reports. No official explanation or resolution appears — the thread drifts into jokes about grammar.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
Does anyone besides me find it odd that the IIUG board would limit the number of nominees for the board positions? I didn't see anything on the IIUG website about this, so the impression is as long as your name got submitted prior to Nov 15, you had a chance. By limiting the number of nominees, it clearly gives "someone" a chance to "hand-pick" who is running and who isn't. If it was a first-come first-served, that too is odd. Not sure of any elections that are run this way, not to mention, it would again be subjective by "someone" to decide who "got their first." I know that Sam (Gentsch) is running the election this year, and I'm in no way implying that Sam is not handling details fairly. I really just want to know why it is being done this way. I know one person who submittted their name that has already been turned away. Again - I don't think this makes sense. BTW - I didn't run again...been there, done that. The "political nature" of the board operations will surprise any rookies - hope they're up for it. Thanks - Mark.
I think this is a great question and look forward to an answer. On 21 Nov 2006 10:11:11 -0800, mark.scranton@gmail.com <mark.scranton@gmail.com> wrote: > Does anyone besides me find it odd that the IIUG board would limit the > number of nominees for the board positions? I didn't see anything on > the IIUG website about this, so the impression is as long as your name > got submitted prior to Nov 15, you had a chance. By limiting the number > of nominees, it clearly gives "someone" a chance to "hand-pick" who is > running and who isn't. If it was a first-come first-served, that too is > odd. Not sure of any elections that are run this way, not to mention, > it would again be subjective by "someone" to decide who "got their > first." > > I know that Sam (Gentsch) is running the election this year, and I'm in > no way implying that Sam is not handling details fairly. I really just > want to know why it is being done this way. I know one person who > submittted their name that has already been turned away. Again - I > don't think this makes sense. > > BTW - I didn't run again...been there, done that. The "political > nature" of the board operations will surprise any rookies - hope > they're up for it. > > Thanks - > Mark. > > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list >
Back in the day..... We took everyone's nomination. We did start sorting through the nonminations looking for people who *qualified*. We started doing this, *qualification step*, when there were *some* people who were nominated, elected, and then never did a damn thing for the IIUG or even show up at board meetings.... Kicking a board member off the island and then replacing him/her,,,was/is next to impossible. I think everyone who spends the time to fill out the nomination form should be considered and offered up to the membership for election. How can the IIUG "Look forward to someone's support" when they turn people away? I think term limits should be set for the board and the President. I think DB2 sucks. I think the board should report the details of it's board meetings to it's membership. I think "Forum 2006" in Washington, D.C. is a great event and I'm really looking forward to it. Jerry --- "mark.scranton@gmail.com" <mark.scranton@gmail.com> wrote: > Does anyone besides me find it odd that the IIUG > board would limit the > number of nominees for the board positions? I didn't > see anything on > the IIUG website about this, so the impression is as > long as your name > got submitted prior to Nov 15, you had a chance. By > limiting the number > of nominees, it clearly gives "someone" a chance to > "hand-pick" who is > running and who isn't. If it was a first-come > first-served, that too is > odd. Not sure of any elections that are run this > way, not to mention, > it would again be subjective by "someone" to decide > who "got their > first." > > I know that Sam (Gentsch) is running the election > this year, and I'm in > no way implying that Sam is not handling details > fairly. I really just > want to know why it is being done this way. I know > one person who > submittted their name that has already been turned > away. Again - I > don't think this makes sense. > > BTW - I didn't run again...been there, done that. > The "political > nature" of the board operations will surprise any > rookies - hope > they're up for it. > > Thanks - > Mark. > > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sponsored Link $200,000 mortgage for $660/ mo 30/15 yr fixed, reduce debt http://yahoo.ratemarketplace.com
"Jerry Hamilton" <bigdaddyjerry@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:mailman.329.1164143104.29126.informix-list@iiug.org... > I think the board should report the details of it's > board meetings to it's membership. "I think that the board should report the details of its board meetings to its membership" would be grammatically correct. To be pedantic though, I expect that the board already does so. Possibly what you actually meant to say was: "I think that the board should report the details of its board meetings to the IIUG membership". I feel bad now because I've picked on someone for whom English is not the first language ....
Captain Pedantic wrote: > "Jerry Hamilton" <bigdaddyjerry@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.329.1164143104.29126.informix-list@iiug.org... > > >>I think the board should report the details of it's >>board meetings to it's membership. > > > "I think that the board should report the details of its board meetings to > its membership" would be grammatically correct. To be pedantic though, I > expect that the board already does so. Possibly what you actually meant to > say was: "I think that the board should report the details of its board > meetings to the IIUG membership". > > I feel bad now because I've picked on someone for whom English is not the > first language .... > > Don't feel too bad, after all, there is nobody for whom English is the first language. I'm pretty certain there were languages before English. Now if you'd said *their* first language ... I feel bad now, but only because I usually make grammatical errors when criticizing other's English.
"Ian Wilson" <scobloke2@infotop.co.uk> wrote in message news:K4OdndBI77q3ufnYRVnysg@bt.com... > Captain Pedantic wrote: >> "Jerry Hamilton" <bigdaddyjerry@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:mailman.329.1164143104.29126.informix-list@iiug.org... > I feel bad now, but only because I usually make grammatical errors when > criticizing other's English. ... others' English.