Please reply to the above poll to sign in to the meeting
Printable View
Please reply to the above poll to sign in to the meeting
It's the wee hours of the morning, I am signing in to post a quick welcome message, then catch a few zzzzz's.
I will be back in the morning to post my other reports.
Bob G.
Hi Bob G and Lyle:
According to the " Members' List " feature of the CFC Boards, 19 governors attended the meeting yesterday, Sat., Jan. 15.
But only about 12 were signed in as of 11:59 PM EST.
Maybe a further plea to attending governors, to sign in is required?
Also, could you clarify whether a governor who in fact attends, but does not sign in, will be treated as " NOT attending "? Also then, will you confirm, if that is your intention, that any governor not signed in will NOT BE ALLOWED to vote ( however we do it this meeting - whether using the Board format, or e-mail ). I think this is really critical for governors to understand, because of the potential number of constitutional amendment motions. If we do it by e-mail, do they then require not only a 2/3 majority, but also a minimum quorum of 50% of the governors present at the meeting , or 30 governors! This will be very hard to achieve anyway, given turnout so far, and impossible if governors attend and don't sign in, and therefore can't be counted. All constitutional amendments are going to fail for lack of quorum.
This is one of the reasons Procedures' Committee tried to make it clear that the on-line meeting voting, like the AGM, did NOT require a constitutional amendment quorum. Is it your intention that any constitutional amendment motions in this meeting, have to meet both enhanced majority and quorum?
All this needs to be clarified, to put pressure on all governors to attend, and on those attending, to sign in.
Bob
After 2 days of the 2010 Fall Meeting, 57 % of the governors had attended ( 34/60 ).
Now, after 2 days ( Sat. Noon - Mon. Noon ), we have 47 % attendance ( 28/60 ). It is a bit disappointing to be furhter behind than our last meeting, given that governors have now had a chance to get used to the new format - we have not yet reached 50 %. But we did start on the weekend, and there were some governors at tournaments, and so hopefully we will now see these numbers rise.
It is my recollection that by the end of the 2010 Fall Meeting, we had achieved 70% attendance ( 42/60 governors ). Will we be able to equal, or break that record?
I would note that during the 2010 Fall Meeting, I, as Posting Secretary, sent out to all governors ( both those attending and those not ) daily bulletins ( 6 of them ) covering what progress was being made, what votes were coming up and generally encouraging those who had not yet attended, to consider coming. Maybe Lyle, as Posting Secretary this meeting, might consider a similar type bulletin or two to all governors, or at least those who have not yet signed in - just a suggestion - I think it helped boost attendance last time.
Bob
It is a bit disappointing to see attendance down. Lyle does have a business to run. I think we need to keep that in mind.
Bob A. - there is nothing to stop you (or any other governor) from encouraging fellow governors to attend. :)
Hi Bob G:
I may not be the best one !:)
I've been advised on more than one occasion I send too many e-mails to busy governors ( with the implication generally that they are inconsequential or duplicative ).
Does somebody else want to take the heat for a while?:D
Bob A
I spent the weekend at the Ottawa Winter Open.
Why does my work impact what I do here more (or less) than anybody else's?
I'm assuming most of the people here are here once or twice a day rather than being here 24x7.... this was after all one of the selling points of this format!
I note that we have now gone over 50% attendance ( 31/60 governors ) ! Let's hope it continues to rise as the meeting goes on. It would be nice to match the 2010 Fall Meeting record of 70% ( 42/60 governors ).
Bob
After three full days of meeting ( Sat. Jan. 15 noon - Tues. Jan. 18 noon ), we have now reached 58% attendance ( 35/60 governors ). So attendance has slowly been climbing each day.
The record is the 2010 Fall Meeting where we achieved 70& attendance ( 42/60 governors ). Will we be able to equal that mark this 2011 Winter Meeting?
Discussion, as directed by Bob G, is to continue past the time set in the Meeting Procedures, to midnight Thursday, Jan. 20. After that, voting will start ( by e-mail this meeting, and only by those who have signed in at the meeting ). So there is still lots that can be accomplished.
If you know a governor who has not attended yet, nudge them to consider it - it is, in my view, a key obligation in becoming a governor, to attend the AGM ( at least by proxy ) and all quarterly on-line meetings ( they last 7 days, and sometimes longer, and all should be able to attend at least once ).
I will take a risk, and send this post to all governors ( sorry to those attending, but I'm not willing to take the time to try to set up an e-mail group of only those who haven't yet attended - so I apologize that you will get an e-mail you don't need ), to encourage non-attenders to still come.
Bob
Ladies and gents,
Voting on this meeting's motions is now open. Please follow the directions in the 'sticky' notice for directions on how to vote.
Sorry Lyle. On another thread somewhere, I promised everyone to keep discussion and amendment phase open until at least thursday evening at midnight.
I should have posted it here! :o
Please close the voting booth.
Hi Bob G:
Questions about scheduling -
Voting will start Friday, Jan. 21, at 12:00 AM EST, according to your last posted direction as I understood it. Until then, discussion on motions could continue, and amendments to existing motions could be tabled.
1. How long then will voting be open? - what is the deadline for submitting the vote by e-mail to you/Lyle? Is it going to be by Saturday noon EST, Jan. 22, exactly 7 days after the meeting started on Sat., Jan. 15 at noon EST?
2. Have you ruled that during voting, the motion discussion threads will be closed, and that no more amending motions can be filed?
3. Is your closing address scheduled for noon EST on Sat., Jan. 22?
Bob A
After 4 1/2 days of meeting ( Sat. Jan. 15 noon - Wed. Jan. 20, 9:00 PM EST ), we have now moved up from 58% attendance ( 35/60 governors ) 2 days ago, to 62% ( 37/60 governors ). So attendance increase has now slowed down to a trickle.
The record is the 2010 Fall Meeting where we achieved 70% attendance ( 42/60 governors ). It looks like we will not be able to equal that mark this 2011 Winter Meeting - a bit disappointing, given that governors have now had 2 successful prior meetings, and so know how valuable they are to current CFC governance.
Voting will start as I understand it at the moment, at 12:00 AM Friday, Jan. 21 ( by e-mail this meeting, and only by those who have signed in at the meeting ).
I fear however, that we may now have a problem.
Under the Meeting Procedures, voting would have started Tuesday night. But Bob G thought it best at the time to delay the vote start to Friday morning. What I have noticed though is a dramatic drop-off in posts since this morning ( Wednesday ). Yes there are, as Lyle noted in a post, a handfull of regular posters moving debate forward ( especially on the youth issues ), but the vast majority of governors signed in have ceased to post entirely.
Have they said their piece on the live agenda issues in the first 3 1/2 days, felt they'd done their duty as a governor, and now gone away?? Will they come back to vote in the early hours of Friday morning, and the time left before the voting deadline? I guess we'll see when the votes are counted, what the governor voting paticipation rate will be. I fear that the delaying of the onset of voting, though well-intentioned, and arguably sound at the time, may have hurt us - we'll see if my concern is warranted.
In the meantime, I'd ask again, that if you know a governor who has not attended yet, nudge them to consider it - it is, in my view, a key obligation in becoming a governor, to attend the AGM ( at least by proxy ) and all quarterly on-line meetings ( they last 7 days, and sometimes longer, and all should be able to attend at least once ). They still have time to read the discussion threads, or at least the motion ones, and make an informed vote. Voting is what their consituents elected them to do.
But I will not assume the task a second time, as I did the other day, of sending this post to all governors to encourage non-attenders to still come. I will leave that now to some other enterprising governor, since it is not being done by the Meeting Chair or Secretary.
Bob
Is anyone else concerned about the fact that so few governors have been posting since Wednesday morning, given 38 signed in? It is only a few who are making multiple posts.
I imagine many governors who have little to do with youth chess, are leaving the complications of the CYCC amendments to those few governors active in the area. These seem to be the only agenda items still alive.
But still, the fact of the vast majority of governors no longer posting is worriesome to me. Has, as I suggested above, the discussion phase gone on longer than tolerable by most governors?
Bob
I'm not personally concerned... it happens at the AGM in the same way... a lot of people make an initial comment and then it ends up being a discussion with 2-4 people while the rest sit and listen, content to have said their bit.
I can only speak for myself, but I have only posted on issues that I have vested interests in. Regarding the rest, I either do not have anything to post that I feel would add value to the conversation, or I do not feel strongly enough about the matter either way, and will only contribute in terms of voting on the weekend. I'm sure that others are like that.