View Single Post
  #76   Report Post  
Old April 25th 04, 03:06 PM
Mike Coslo
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

There is a widespread and horrible misconception that it is ALL about
"the majority". I see it all the time. On many issues, a majority will
suffice. But there are some things that speak to something higher.

Can a majority in a democracy vote to dissolve the democracy?



Perhaps ... in the US system it would require a Constitutional amendment and
would probably end up being reviewed by the Supreme Court.


(shudder)


Many times the majority would vote to enact laws that are illegal or
unconstitutional.



And many times elected officials that "do their own thing" with little
regard for their constituent's views vote to enact laws that would trod on
the rights and/or sensibilities of their constitutents ... that's another
reason we have "checks and balances" like the Supreme Court.

NCI's Board of Directors are like the legislature in a way - elected
representatives - NOT the Supreme Court.


[snip] When I have been in a leadership
position, I have often polled the membership about their wishes. But it
was always with letting them know that their opinion was taken under
advisement.

Often we made our decisions with the desires of the majority as a
guide. However, there were a few occasions that we did not, and for good
reasons.



If it were morally wrong, or illegal, that's one thing ... but NCI's Board
of Directors debated the issues and, while there was not 100% agreeement on
our personal views we agreed that we should represent our members' views to
the FCC and that we could each file our personal comments to voice our
personal views.


There were even a couple times that I defied the board of
directors on a voted issue. Each time I offered my resignation as the
price of that defiance. Not once was it accepted, nor was my act of
defiance overruled.



So your colleagues on that board "gave you a pass" ... how cute.


If you want to know the details, I was darn near lynched by 4 entire
teams parents after a controversial decision by the Board of Directors.
This was just about half the entire league and 100 percent of the
affected teams. They were going to walk, and that would have wrecked the
league. And it was no idle threat. The BOD decision had eliminated half
the games they would play, and no reduction of fees.

Quick! What would you do? Do you wreck your league by sticking to the
BOD decision, or do you defy it and not lose almost half your teams,
which in this case was effectively all the teams, due to league play
regulations. My decision was to reverse the BOD's decision, get the
parents back in the fold, and quite possibly sacrifice myself in the
process.

I can assure you that the situation was neither cute, nor charming. At
the time, I was thankful for my formidable physical presence!

It could even be argued that I was listening to my constituents. Even
though it was less than half the league, it was 100 percent of the
people affected by the decision. But now, who's the majority in that case?


If I violated my obligations/authority I would expect to be removed from
office ...


I did. I was willing to accept that.


and I would move to remove from office any of my colleagues on
the NCI Board of Directors if they violated their obligations/authority.


A soon as the rest of the BOD saw what happened, they realized their
mistake. Most were in fact grateful that I saved their collective kiesters.

So while people can pontificate on constituents and majorities and
"What You Have To Do", my experience shows that it *isn't that simple*.
Hopefully you won't find yourself in a similar situation. You might find
it easier to hide behind the "decision". At least that way you can say
"It wasn't my fault".



But we still digress here. My main point in all this is that it seems
to me that NCI is growing out if it's previous self defined interest.

- Mike KB3EIA -

- Mike KB3EIA -