Radio Free Registry

[S.J.Szabo]

not

[S.J.Szabo]

[admin]

SJ-
It's really a shame you use your wit and talent at word-smithing to attack people, when what we are working on here is ideas. Yet, somehow you always seem to single out individuals for perceived and imagined transgressions. If you used your mind towards solutions more than bully attack mode we might be able to get some real dialogue going on this forum, but by doing torpedo assaults on anyone who isn't in your boat you either push people off the field, or push them to their extremes, neither of which does anything more than amuse you are your friends, but doesn't help to solve the problems you say the club is facing, a club you quit by the way.
And as far as sticking "barbs" in me, you are going to have to try a lot harder than that, I sold advertising for the better part of ten years and one of my main ad bases was NYC Fashion Houses and while your verbal attacks are good, those ad buyers brought well worded insults to a fine art, not to be rivaled by anything but a Southern Lady, so practice up.
But seriously, while it is fun for you guys to just to sit in this sandbox and kick around anyone who dis-agrees with you, it doesn't go to solving any problems, and it isn't much better than the bully techniques you guys say were inflicted on you on the Registry site.
And before you come back with a well worded and clever rebuttal, please think about what I said and try to see a larger picture.

[S.J.Szabo]

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[Bill Sampson]

A CERTAIN sign of decay and decline in a volunteer organization is continuous holding of the highest offices by the same people. The organization loses fresh ideas and discourages participation by the next "generation" of leaders. New blood is essential to the continued vitality of any organism or organization.

So, the Registry should have term limits for all offices/trustees. Say two terms. That should be enough.

"Trade a player a year too early rather than a year too late." - Branch Rickey

[S.J.Szabo]

Proposed Club Reforms

[Bill Sampson]

SJ suggested making the regional groups "chapters" in effect of the Registry. That's in part the model of, for example, PCA, and many other car clubs. At least one of the regionals was originally formed specifically because of the antics of the Registry board so conceivably some of the regionals would not be interested.

I think a board of around 20 if all the regionals became chapters with each chapter having a seat is unwieldy. It is also anti-democratic since small chapters would be over represented. An example is the US Senate - small states are clearly over-represented. The original purpose of that body was to perpetuate slavery. Whether you think over representation is a good or bad thing is up to you, but, it is a fact if each chapter gets a seat. My main concern here would be a board that would be too big. Especially if they all attended two annual meetings at member expense.

Bill

[merbesfield]

SJ, yes that helps. I am trying to get an understanding of the issues and the players. How are you part of this conversation, other than you are of course a member? Please don't lash out, it is an honest question from a newbie.

PS, if you are not a professional writer, you really missed your calling. This entire thread is quite entertaining and you have some talent there.

[S.J.Szabo]

"Please don't lash out.."

Clearly I am not as talented as you seem to imply.

I'm just another voice in the chorus of those concerned with the current state of affairs of the Club and who would wish for a better Club going forward.

I am currently on hiatus from a membership that has run continuously since 1980. I will return when conditions permit.

[bbspdstr]

I was unable to write or post today but could read while in a hospital waiting room before, during and after my wife's minor out-patient surgery. This thread was lame infighting and name calling. That will only preclude new ideas and added posters here. More participation means more ideas and observations, no matter which "side" someone is on.

I'm glad to see tonight that things have settled down without my input. I would have said..."Hey, I had enough sniping in '69 at Ft Hood" (a TDY school assignment while USAF, go figure). (Those were some serious-as-a-heart-attack and distant dudes!)

Now, maybe more on-lookers will chime in if positive thoughts are encouraged and more than just the same handful of people are vocally against a silent handful of people who run the Registry any way they see fit.

I wish a poll could be taken, even anonymously, to see who thinks certain ideas have merit. The old 'run it up the flagpole and see who salutes' concept.

Like; Term Limits for trustees. Acknowledging that known incumbents have a known advantage over first-time candidates at each election (with exceptions like the last election where a late walk-on I had NEVER heard of won a seat) and seeing that certain incumbents feel (and have said and written) that "if the members don't want us, just don't vote for us, let that be the term limit"...not many fresh ideas or creativity come along. There is plenty of room for discussion and negotiated details, but how do the majority of those who care about such things feel?

However, before such changes can take place I would recommend dialing in what the IRS and the Ohio law says about what a not-for-profit's requirements are. Get an audit, a real audit, to see how the financial health of the organization is. Budgeting and financial planning are part of any smart business, aren't they? (Seems like what Steve Heinrichs is suing about after getting...a-hem...'very little cooperation.')

It would be a good lesson to see how the Registry should be run "by the book." It might be good money spent getting a third party expert on such things to consult.....and not just with the sitting trustees.

Why not?

Even if term limits are not an immediate bylaws change, trustee meeting agendas and minutes should be available to anyone who has an interest.

If a member wishes to sit in on a meeting to monitor (and not participate...delay or interrupt), why can't they or shouldn't they?

That would let anyone interested in club business know in what trustees involve themselves the most, who spends the most time and effort...in other words....people could actually get to know what they do and who does it.

We are always told that they "work so hard in the member's interest," so such information as above would be the "report card" I was accused of "demanding" in the past that would "put more of a burden on trustee's valuable time." I just wonder why, if it's such demanding, time-consuming work...why do some stay at it for decades and some resign a short time after installation, rarely to be heard from again.

[Bill Sampson]

[Bill Sampson]

SJ suggested a reduction of the publishing budget by $125,000. Doubtless sound and my only inquiry would be if the cut should be larger.

I personally know that a high quality EVERY month magazine of 32 pages, all color, can be sent to 3000 members for around $100,000 per year. It's hard to make an apples to apples comparison between that and what the Registry is presently doing, but a smaller magazine sent only 6 times per year would certainly leave some funds available for actual car club events.

[Pat]

Don't overlook the international membership. Many Registry members are outside of the US.

[356JAGER]

DELETED