The Modernized AGM - Different from the Quarterly Governors' Meetings On-LIne?

[Bob Armstrong]

The Modernized AGM - Different from the Quarterly Governors' Meetings On-LIne?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just to be clear - The Governors' Voting Modernization Subcommittee has proposed regular quarterly on-line Governor's Meetings, for which they have proposed a " trial meeting " for April 1-7. See the other thread for discussion on that proposal.

This thread here is referring to the work of the " other " Subcommittee, the one dealing with the AGM specifically - that is the AGM Modernization Subcommittee of Jason Lohner, Chris Mallon and myself ( Chair ). The issue is whether the AGM should be a somewhat different type of meeting from the normal quarterly meetings being proposed in the other thread.

There are multiple questions that the AGM Modernization Subcommittee is working on, such as:

1. If there are a number of Governors present at the Can. Open, is there any benefit in getting them together in the traditional way ( eg. Will all voting have already been done before the meeting under some new system using the Governors’ Discussion Board, or e-mail voting or will it take place at the physical AGM)?

2. If yes to Q# 1, how complicated is it to marry a face to face meeting with 56 governors across the country by some technological means?

3. If we try 2, then how many governors linked by technology will be able to take a number of hours out of their lives at a particular time of the day, to “ attend “ the meeting?

4. If we try 2, how does the technology cope with speaking order of 56 governors, some physically present, some connected by technology – for example, can you have an effective conference call with 61 participants?

5. Do we need a face to face component of an AGM, or can it be a total “ virtual “ meeting?

Jason has written out an explanation of a model AGM he has proposed, and filed with the Subcommittee. Here it is below :

" Modernization of the AGM.

The AGM is a pivotal 'meeting of the minds' for the CFC. Unfortunately Canada is a huge country! For many Governors, getting to the AGM is impossible. Sure Face to Face is nice, but for those of us who can't afford to travel, face to face is unrealistic. Proxies are also an unrealistic option because many of us can't find anyone who is going to the AGM. I know that I for one, can't make it to the AGM and I have no idea who is going that I would trust with my vote.

Luckily we live in a time where technology can solve this problem. All that is needed is some free software and internet access.
On the message board I proposed that we use either Ventrilo or Team Speak VoIP software so that those of us who can't make it to the AGM can participate. Either software package will handle the job and is heavily used in the internet gaming scene. My wife uses the Ventrilo package daily and can handle 30-40 users easily. We could use this software to suppliment the AGM meeting or hold the entire AGM online.

At the AGM site, internet access has to be available. At the AGM site a laptop with the client software and a mic needs to be setup. The 'speaker' would speak into the mic which would be relayed to all of us online. We could then respond either with voice or with text chat. Using this technology those of us who can't make it to the physical site can participate fully. We would just need someone to man the laptop to make sure that those of us online who wanted to speak, would speak in order. We would need to rent a 'Ventrilo server' which costs $20 for one month for 50 users or $30 for 75 users. If we switched to an 'online AGM' this would be even more simple, but some people like the face to face.

Heres a diagram

AGM laptop/mic <------> Ventrilo server <-------> Governors who can't make it but with to participate.

Those of us who wish to use the internet would just 'log on' to the Ventrilo server as would the laptop at the AGM. When the online Governors wish to speak (when in turn), they would type in a message that they wish to comment and the person manning the laptop would tell them when to they can start. A Mic attached to the laptop would relay the meeting to those of us online so we could all hear. The only other thing I would recommend is that a set of cheap computer speakers be hooked up to the laptop so that the rest of the AGM meeting can hear those of us online.

This is my proposal to update the AGM. "

Chris Mallon is also working on submitting to the Subcommittee his model, that may be different. We will be presenting it for review as well, once it is received.

In the meantime, if you have any comments for Jason, please post here re the new model for an AGM.

Bob

[Peter McKillop]

Bob, I hope you're running for President this year.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Peter:

I love your sense of humour ( to repeat someone famous ) !

Bob

[Bob Gillanders]

Thank you Jason for the research and description of how the AGM would work, sounds excellent. I sure hope that a dress rehearsal will be scheduled before the AGM!!

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob:

The Governors' Voting Modernization Subcommittee is trying for a " trial " meeting of the normal, quarterly on-line governors' meeting for April 1 - 7.

The AGM Modernization Subcommittee can shoot for a trial AGM meeting for Saturday, May 29, assuming we can file our final report with the Procedures' Committee sufficiently before that date. We'd get a number of governors together here in Toronto, physically, to duplicate the AGM setting.

We'll see what type of public feedback we get on Jason's model, and whether it is the only possible model - there may be others. I'd like to have the new model in place for the July AGM, but that may be difficult, especially if we need to actually have some motion passed authorizing the new model. There's not much time for motions, given the number of GL's expected between now and July. It's a challenge.

Bob

[Ken Craft]

I second Peter's sentiments. We need a President who communicates as much as Bob does.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Peter and Ken:

Thanks for your encouragement of my efforts to improve the CFC, and have members know what is going on. But I am very satisfied to continue my role as an active governor. I hope that it will encourage other governors to take initiative - it is not only the executive that can start good things rolling.

As to the role of President, I have, under current circumstances, already given my support to Eric should he run again for a second consecutive term. Secondly, I am not in a personal position to be able to go onto the executive. With the time I have available for chess, I try to make a contribution from my position as governor. Many good people need to contribute in different ways for CFC to make progress - I am contributing from my current position; I look forward to a number of other good people coming forward in July for the AGM, to run for executive positions ( both incumbents and newbies ).

Again, thanks for the support - it helps my commitment to continue to bring motions, make suggestions, sometimes harass our executive a bit, etc.

Bob

[Ken Craft]

So how can you as a Governor Bob, encourage the President and the Executive to communicate more with often with thr Governors?

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Ken:

When Eric ran on a platform of greater communication with the governors/members/public, I told him that was one of the reasons I supported him, and encouraged him to stick to his commitment.

Since the AGM I have a couple of times told him personally by phone that communication was important, and I have posted that comment as well numbers of times.

Lastly, I had hoped to lead by example - I try hard to let the governors/members/public know what CFC stuff I'm involved in, so they know that something is happening, that the CFC is not a dead corpse.

But I have to admit that Eric has somewhat disappeared after his initial good communication at the start of his term, and his response to the first budget questions. He failed to return thereafter to answer outstanding questions and supplementary questions on the budget, leading to his revised 2009-10 budget being defeated. And since then I only remember one or two posts by him ( though in his defence, he did advise me he was not well in late Dec./early January, and CFC stuff got put on hold ). As to the rest of the executive, we never hear from Stijn nor Lyle, seldom from Maurice, and posts from Michael and Hal fairly regularly. In my view, more communication would certainly not hurt, and would be appreciated - I think Eric's platform raised expectations, as it was meant to - it is up to Eric to come through on his promise.

Lastly, I think it is important that governors post questions of the executive. This makes it clear that response is required. Faillure to respond makes the deficiency obvious, and creates a record of default. It is a fairly weak position to just claim that the executive don't talk at us governors enough. This tactic might help.

Bob

[Bob Gillanders]

Lastly, I had hoped to lead by example - I try hard to let the governors/members/public know what CFC stuff I'm involved in, so they know that something is happening, that the CFC is not a dead corpse.

Bob

Bob, you have done a stellar job of leading by example. Despite some improvements, communication continues to be a major CFC deficiency.

Thanks for your efforts. I hope others will pick up the slack before you run out of gas!