Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() 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 - |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|