Upcoming AGA projects, volunteers needed, info, etc etc etc

daniel_the_smith · **#81**

Bantari wrote:

In an ideal world, we would have an active AGA forum (part of L19 or not) where projects could be explained, monitored, and input could be given and ideas exchanged. Transparently. To me, this should be the FIRST priority of the board members - bring it all into the open, and empower people rather than disillusioning them. And that's not just for AGA - I don't see why any of the associations shouldn't be doing that. To me, its common sense, and this is how I would run things if I was in charge. Call me naive... but what's right is right.

One of my goals, which may or may not be equally naive, is to have discussions here or where ever is appropriate *before* the relevant votes happen. Please feel free to call me out in a few months if you think I could be doing better on this score.

Joaz Banbeck · **#82**

Bantari wrote:

...
In an ideal world, we would have an active AGA forum (part of L19 or not) where projects could be explained, monitored, and input could be given and ideas exchanged. Transparently...

daniel_the_smith wrote:

...
One of my goals, which may or may not be equally naive, is to have discussions here or where ever is appropriate *before* the relevant votes happen...

[admin]
I think that I can speak for all the admins when I say that we will be happy to support this; that we will give you as much forum space as you want, structured with sub-forums in whatever way you want it.
[/admin]

Bantari · **#83**

daniel_the_smith wrote:

Bantari wrote:

In an ideal world, we would have an active AGA forum (part of L19 or not) where projects could be explained, monitored, and input could be given and ideas exchanged. Transparently. To me, this should be the FIRST priority of the board members - bring it all into the open, and empower people rather than disillusioning them. And that's not just for AGA - I don't see why any of the associations shouldn't be doing that. To me, its common sense, and this is how I would run things if I was in charge. Call me naive... but what's right is right.

One of my goals, which may or may not be equally naive, is to have discussions here or where ever is appropriate *before* the relevant votes happen. Please feel free to call me out in a few months if you think I could be doing better on this score.

Don't need to wait a few months.. you are doing fine.

But... are you the policy-maker in AGA? Are you the board member? If so, great that you are so active... But even then - the whole board needs to get involved, I feel. An odd member here and there is cool, but this does not really change things.

daniel_the_smith · **#84**

Bantari wrote:

But... are you the policy-maker in AGA? Are you the board member? If so, great that you are so active... But even then - the whole board needs to get involved, I feel. An odd member here and there is cool, but this does not really change things.

I'm the central region's board member elect at the moment, my term starts next month (I am not the board member previously alluded to on this thread). I think I'm going to concentrate on making things more transparent at first. From this thread, others like it, and personal conversations at congress and elsewhere I'm think I'm getting a picture of some things I would like to see happen. After I'm more acquainted with the politics we'll see if/how many toes need to be stepped on to improve things.

BTW, I don't think it's reasonable to expect every board member to be as chatty as I am. As it happens, though, the chapters mailing list is down and (apparently) has been for quite some time, so I'm not sure how exactly the board does expect to be communicating with the members. :scratch:

xed_over · **#85**

daniel_the_smith wrote:

I'm not sure how exactly the board does expect to be communicating with the members. :scratch:

in my short half dozen years as a member, I still haven't figured this one out either.

Joaz Banbeck · **#86**

daniel_the_smith wrote:

... I'm not sure how exactly the board does expect to be communicating with the members. :scratch:

You're doing as well - or better - than any board member that I've ever seen.

hyperpape · **#87**

malweth wrote:

If I can put what Bantari wrote another way. This is how I see it:

The AGA, as the governing body, acts as the sponsor. The members of the AGA are the customer, and the volunteers are the contractors. The AGA is responsible for finding out what the customer wants and conveying that information to the volunteers. This is a two way street: updates should be fed back to the AGA and feedback back to the volunteer. The AGA leads are the facilitators of this process.

So the volunteers get paid and (probably) don't consume the service?

malweth · **#88**

hyperpape wrote:

So the volunteers get paid and (probably) don't consume the service?

If they got paid, they wouldn't be volunteers!

The metaphor breaks down a bit in that the volunteers are also one subset of the general membership... but I don't see much of a problem with that... interest drives motivation! (It just doesn't sustain motivation).

Bantari · **#89**

daniel_the_smith wrote:

I'm the central region's board member elect at the moment, my term starts next month (I am not the board member previously alluded to on this thread). I think I'm going to concentrate on making things more transparent at first. From this thread, others like it, and personal conversations at congress and elsewhere I'm think I'm getting a picture of some things I would like to see happen. After I'm more acquainted with the politics we'll see if/how many toes need to be stepped on to improve things.

Great!
AGA needs more like you, then!

daniel_the_smith wrote:

BTW, I don't think it's reasonable to expect every board member to be as chatty as I am.

I sort-of disagree with you on this one.
You are very chatty, this is true, and you are right that not every board member can possibly be like that.

However - I think that for an elected official it should be one of the FIRST duties to keep in touch with the people who elected them, which probably means all of the AGA members. In a sense - those little AGA members are the elected official's employers. So such official, while not necessarily chatty, should be available - which possibly means a forum like this one. Available AND responsive, not only lurking. As it is - I am not even sure if any of the board members are even lurking to see what AGA members have to say.

Working 'through channels' is all fine and dandy, but it tends to disassociate the leadership from the grass roots. And this is never good.

So, in this context - I would expect all the board members to also be active members of some public forum (and not a mailing list, its so yesterday) on which they can be reached and where they can OPENLY express their opinions and discuss things - possibly with all the little members having some input as well.

Call me an idealist, but this is what I would call 'nice'.

John Fairbairn · **#90**

Quote:

However - I think that for an elected official it should be one of the FIRST duties to keep in touch with the people who elected them, which probably means all of the AGA members. In a sense - those little AGA members are the elected official's employers. So such official, while not necessarily chatty, should be available - which possibly means a forum like this one. Available AND responsive, not only lurking. As it is - I am not even sure if any of the board members are even lurking to see what AGA members have to say.

Working 'through channels' is all fine and dandy, but it tends to disassociate the leadership from the grass roots. And this is never good.

Well said. I completely agree. Especially for elected officials. You have to be a certain type of outgoing person to stand for election in the first place, so communication is unlikely to be a hardship for such a person. It's more likely that a new or junior official doesn't want to be thought, by communicating publicly, to be showing off, or showing up less communicative officials. The President needs to set the tone here and assure all officials that public communication is part of the job spec.

daniel_the_smith · **#91**

I'd just like to note for those who may not have read the AGA's by-laws (http://usgo.org/governance/2005bylaws.pdf), that the AGA, as far as I can tell, is set up such that the president's job is to implement the board's policies. The board appoints the president, he's not selected by the general membership, etc. My point being, if anything, the board should be "setting an example" for the president, not the other way around.

Also, I know at least one other board member lurks here occasionally and has posted a couple times. And as previously mentioned, my fellow central rep visited many of the clubs in the central region last year, a feat I won't be able to match. But, point taken: you guys don't feel like there's a lot of interaction with the board, and as far as I can tell, you're right.

PS: seigenblues, sorry for the threadjacking :/

Horibe · **#92**

daniel_the_smith wrote:

I'd just like to note for those who may not have read the AGA's by-laws (http://usgo.org/governance/2005bylaws.pdf), that the AGA, as far as I can tell, is set up such that the president's job is to implement the board's policies. The board appoints the president, he's not selected by the general membership, etc. My point being, if anything, the board should be "setting an example" for the president, not the other way around.

Also, I know at least one other board member lurks here occasionally and has posted a couple times. And as previously mentioned, my fellow central rep visited many of the clubs in the central region last year, a feat I won't be able to match. But, point taken: you guys don't feel like there's a lot of interaction with the board, and as far as I can tell, you're right.

PS: seigenblues, sorry for the threadjacking :/

Nice post, and certainly accurate.

On the other hand there is another aspect to the Board - President relationship that needs to be understood. As a practical matter, the system in place has issues, and may not yet be working properly - at least as the comments on the website suggest was originally envisioned.

The Board is supposed to be looking at the big picture, the long view and not the everyday, every month details. The President runs the organization. It seems the proper balance on this front has not been struck.

As such, the Board is not a "Congress" where constituincy responsiveness should be the biggest priority, in my view. This is not to say that such efforts and work are not welcome - but it does raise another issue the AGA struggles with. The need for 7 quality, outgoing people to fill the board, means 7 fewer almost ideal people to handle AGA operational positions.

In my view, I think the Board members and the President should be monitoring forums like this. But I do not necessarily feel it is the Board members' duty to be responsive - the President or the President's designee (perhaps seigenblues?) should take the lead in that role.

Arguably, all kinds of communications can be welcome, and this is particuarly true for the President communicating in both directions - to the membership, and the Board.

It is also arguable, however, that the Board, as a more deliberative body, should think before it speaks, investigate before it decides, and confer before it declares.

vash3g · **#93**

Horibe wrote:

In my view, I think the Board members and the President should be monitoring forums like this. But I do not necessarily feel it is the Board members' duty to be responsive - the President or the President's designee (perhaps seigenblues?) should take the lead in that role.

From a couple of the board members i chatted with at congress, about this specific issue, it is "too difficult" to sift through everything on the forum. Which to me says they don't care what we talk about.

xed_over · **#94**

vash3g wrote:

Horibe wrote:

In my view, I think the Board members and the President should be monitoring forums like this. But I do not necessarily feel it is the Board members' duty to be responsive - the President or the President's designee (perhaps seigenblues?) should take the lead in that role.

From a couple of the board members i chatted with at congress, about this specific issue, it is "too difficult" to sift through everything on the forum. Which to me says they don't care what we talk about.

but we have a very specific AGA sub-forum here, that honestly gets very little traffic. And if you subscribe to it, it'll send you email.

at the same time, there's probably not a large population of aga members who lurk/post here anyway. (many of the youth are over at Tiger's Mouth)

Joaz Banbeck · **#95**

Horibe wrote:

... I think the Board members and the President should be monitoring forums like this...

They might be doing so. The prez, Allan Abramsom, has an account here; as does Andy Okun, Lisa Scott, and obviously, Daniel Smith. I've been talking to at least one other board member about joining, and he is at least lurking now. And, of course, any of them could have accounts but not announce themselves.

aokun · **#96**

Joaz Banbeck wrote:

They might be doing so. The prez, Allan Abramsom, has an account here; as does Andy Okun, Lisa Scott, and obviously, Daniel Smith. I've been talking to at least one other board member about joining, and he is at least lurking now. And, of course, any of them could have accounts but not announce themselves.

To follow up, I check this forum section every few weeks and read the threads with interest and appreciation and I believe other board members and staff do too. I don't post about AGA issues, but I do read about them. My 19x19 posts are limited now to the quietly inoffensive. I hope.

Andy

daniel_the_smith · **#97**

daniel_the_smith wrote:

The direction this conversation took is interesting. Yesterday, I submitted something to the ejournal about my last club meeting...

http://www.usgo.org/news/2011/08/ting-l ... g-go-club/

hyperpape · **#98**

I've been looking at pdfs of the old BGA Journals. I'd love to see the AGA do something similar. Right now, there are ejournals available starting in 2000, but the physical journal from before then isn't available, afaik.

pwaldron · **#99**

hyperpape wrote:

I've been looking at pdfs of the old BGA Journals. I'd love to see the AGA do something similar. Right now, there are ejournals available starting in 2000, but the physical journal from before then isn't available, afaik.

I suggested this in 2008 (http://www.usgo.org/media/File/2008_03_ ... Report.pdf) and nothing has come of it. Given this entire process could be outsourced to a company I can only assume they're not interested or it's too expensive.

hyperpape · **#100**

I think it would not actually be that expensive: http://singularityhub.com/2011/08/18/co ... larity+Hub)&utm_content=Google+Reader. Might be a few hundred bucks.

Upcoming AGA projects, volunteers needed, info, etc etc etc

Who is online