Spraggett states his opinion on the issue quite graphically.
http://kevinspraggett.blogspot.com/
Hi Bob. If Ken leaks information about online meetings, shall we refer to him as New Brunswicki Leaks?
Seriously, the more I think about this the more I'm inclined to agree that "real time harassment" is a big problem for the CFC. So long as the CFC publishes an agenda by some reasonable cut off date prior to any meeting - so that members can contact their local governors (directly or via message boards) to weigh in on any issues of concern - and provided that a proper set of minutes is published within a reasonable time frame after each meeting, then I don't see why govs and execs should have to endure having every single word of their deliberations scrutinized by the sometimes-crazed-with-anger (...who me???) members.
I think every other democratic would prefer to meet in private and not have its words judged in real time, Peter. That isn't consistent with transparent governance.
Thank you Peter. Your ideas sound very reasonable and worthy of discussion. The executive and governors do overwhelmingly support the concepts of transparency and openness. We just need to find the proper balance to maintain good decorum and effective communications.
Having said that, please keep in mind that any changes to current practices need to be approved by the governors. I am sure you will have no difficulty in finding a governor willing to work with you to draft the appropriate motions for the April governors meeting.
A few years back we used to live as members of a Co-op organization which owned the buildings; in order to join them you would have to pay a shares deposit and had one vote in all matters related to the organization.
All meetings were public for all members, including the board of directors meetings. Only sensitive subjects would be discussed in-camera!
Could anyone explain why CFC can't use the same model?
How about: arguments about what should and should not be 'in camera' ?
Seriously, it seems the CFC spends a HUGE proportion of time and energy on matters that have nothing to do with CHESS. It wouldn't be so bad if all this admin/procedural crap took place in the background while a lot of grass roots initiatives were taking place, but I see no evidence that is the case.