International Region

Ed,

Glad to hear you're willing to serve as International Director. I did not receive that e-mail. We are in the middle of the election now and nominations are closed. I think the proper procedure at this point will be for the Board to fill the vacancy. Glad to hear you're making yourself available.

Since I said I'll poll the International Region members I will do that before bringing the vacancy to the Board to be filled. I hope the majority of the International Region members vote to continue the region.

Cloyd
 
And I to throw my thanks and support to Ed for stepping up. The idea is to provide as much support and communication as we can. IF any member feels that their regional director cannot, does not or will not provide that support and communication then go around that road block and get to any member of the board.

The goal is unity ('all for one and one for all') not alienation!

Chris
 
Thanks for all the support - I must make it clear my discussions are not about any Regional Directors inabilities, on the contrary - I have always been impressed with all the BAC volunteers endless efforts in all postions! My beef has only ever been about how the regions were geographically changed after the formation of BAC.

Ed Fitchett
 
Imho, members should have more of a say in BAC decisions.

EFitchett said:
My beef has only ever been about how the regions were geographically changed after the formation of BAC.

Ed Fitchett
Click to expand...
 
Simik-

Please explain that posting a little bit.

Specifically, why do you think yourself and other members don't have as much "say" as you believe they should?

Please site an example where a decision was reached without membership involvement.

How can the the channels of communication get any better?

Thanks!
Chris L.
 
International

Bear with me, folks, doing a little "wool gathering" here.
It is often said, regarding our British friends, that we are two peoples separated by a common language. But with Canada and the US so intimately bound with language, custom, economics and only a long line on a map dividing us, we Yanks often succumb to the benign ignorance of any majority. That is to say, ANY majority of a group tends to think that everyone else is satisfied with what the majority is comfortable with. The old problem of: "Why, we down here think this is fine and good for us...it should also be good for the land of the Maple Leaf. After all, they're practically Americans..right??"
(I cringe just writing that because I hear it all the time. I apologise for my countrymen.)

So is the heart of the issue one of:
A) the majority are US centered and cannot see others feelings?
B) can that thin border really be made transparent enough to solve things viz Canada? And if so,
C) would the non-North American membership feel TRULY alienated by the larger majority thus formed?

In practical terms Canada is even more thinly stretched, east to west, than the US. (Would there be a North/South issue within Canada?) Can a Canadian Region solve this? (No, not for our border neighbors, I guess.)
And what of other countries? There is no realistic way to participate in a Fly-In across the pond. (Hmm, someone educate me, do we have members in Mexico? Or just the Southwest version of what we call "Snowbirds" on the east coast?)
There are many examples of interest groups (scientific, religious, philosophical, and collectors) who, separated by vast distance, maintain warm and mutually useful correspondence. And can, eventually, meet face to face.
And is that enough "value" for Tony, Allan, and others "over there", "down under", or otherwise distant from the US?

OK, I'll shut up. But I feel that perhaps the simplest method is to let the
"Internationals" offer a plan they, themselves, feel comfortable with.
Steve Cote,
The Northeast Region of The Greater Whole

And that's it for me tonight. I am exhausted from selling Christmas trees all weekend...Canadian trees, I might add!
 
For me, BAC is truly a global group. Mike R's comment about assisting everyone to the same extent is surely an understatement. It is this true sense of comradeship that is the core of this organisation. The medium of the internet makes the next person as close as any neighbour, regardless of where they reside. So, if any Canadian (or any other "so near" )members feel they would be better served by "belonging" to any other region, then why can't they? Does it matter one ounce whether a "Northern Reigon" member lives on the other side of a topographical line?
I may be an "international" but if I get the opportunity to get to a "south eastern" fly-in (which could happen) I will be there as a BAC member, not a foreigner.
 
I'd like some info also? I've not seen any comments here from folks that had
(have) issues with the original setup. Perhaps that was in the past & is no longer an issue.

EFitchett said:
no one can seem to tell me who it was that complained about the way it was set up before
Click to expand...
 
simik said:
I'd like some info also? I've not seen any comments here from folks that had
(have) issues with the original setup. Perhaps that was in the past & is no longer an issue.

EFitchett said:
no one can seem to tell me who it was that complained about the way it was set up before
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I don't recall specifically but in general, did it have to be a complaint? Perhaps the idea was suggested and a discussion ensued. I'd like to think it was an attempt to make BAC better not a resolution to a complaint.
 
Point for me is that nobody seems to even know 'who' brought up the issue in the first place..that then led to the International Region. Guess those folks aren't around anymore..& here we are.

Sounds like a whoodunit :roll:
 
Clinderman said:
Specifically, why do you think yourself and other members don't have as much "say" as you believe they should?
Click to expand...

Not aware of any membership voting on any issues (or decisions made), outsid'a the elections.

Clinderman said:
How can the the channels of communication get any better?
Click to expand...

Members have a say in things & higher ups listen more..:)

Membership decides more than just the election results.
 
Paralized

I have had many years experience in local politics, both watching and participating. Right now, BAC has the general officers and all the Regional Directors who apparently all manage to have meetings from time-to-time to complete the work of the organization.

One thing I noticed in the political arena is that once you get past 5 members on any board, commission or council, you start drifting towards paralysis. Frankly it is just to many people to complete effective debate in a reasonable amount of time.

BAC probably works because most of the decisions are not political. This "International" thing is apparently the exception to that as the response from some has the same fervor as political issues.

I want the individual members to have as much say as possible in all BAC business and they have a way to do so, through their representation and/or by running for the office. I'll certainly do my best to forward all concerns as issues emerge. On the other hand, taking things to a general membership vote needs to be considered very carefully. I'm not even sure that the "districting", whenever it occured or was modified would rise to a level that I think requires direct member voting.

Note that I said direct member voting, not direct member input. I think that polling the international members is the right thing to do. But putting it to a member wide vote may not resolve the issue practically. For example, who votes? Just the international members? If all, will the international members be satisfied given that the non-international members had nothing really at stake.

At this point, I prefer to make no judgements about a viable solution. I want to see the input from the poll and hopefully, see some comments from those international members who have less emotion invested in the issue.

Dan Jonas
Napa Valley
 
simik said:
I've not seen any comments here from folks that had
(have) issues with the original setup.
Click to expand...

Most of the comments we receive, positive and negative, are posted directly to members of the board via email.
 
simik said:
Members have a say in things & higher ups listen more..:)

Membership decides more than just the election results.
Click to expand...

Sounds good but rarely works. I site two examples, 1) this discussion...less than 15 members have participated 2) my request for suggestions for the membership drive.....I got only ONE suggestion from the members.

Organizations have to have leaders that move the process along. Every decision cannot be a plebiscite or we wouldn't get much accomplished. Having said that, input from the members is valuable and wanted but as you can see, few participate because of any number of reasons and as a result, the elected leaders have to make a decision.

And so it goes....
Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top