Bob Armstrong
07-21-2009, 02:16 AM
I have decided that Governors who post on the CFC Governors Discussion board intend their posts to be confidential, otherwise they'd post them themselves on the members' CFC Chess Forum. So I will respect this.
But my own posts are my own business. So if it is not on a confidential matter, and I think the membership would be interested to know that a certain discussion is taking place there, I will generally post it here.
On the following post, I have had 60 views. But only 1 governor has agreed with the post. There were 2 other posts on tangential issues, that were non-committal.
What do you think of the position I have taken in this post? What would you have expected as governor posting response?
Here is the post :
07-17-2009, 12:51 PM
Bob Armstrong
CFC Governor
CFC Governors Missing in Action
Posted on the members' CFC Chess Forum on July 14 by me:
" Monday also was important for the fact that the outgoing CFC governors held their AGM in the morning. Well, important to some people - the CFC President was not there, although he called in and answered questions by speakerphone for a few minutes; the VP was not there ( he was covering for his boss and couldn't get time off ); the Treasurer and Secretary and Junior Coordinator were not there. There were a grand total of 8 out of 61 governors present - and there were only 17 proxies sent in - a grand total of 25 governors of 61 checking in at the main meeting of the year. Something seems wrong with this picture. There were also 4 CFC ordinary members who attended.
Reports of some of the executive were filed, but for some there was no report ( not too good ). "
Very " not too good ".
We governors may have defeated the Motion 2009-14 to reduce the number of provincial representation governors by half at the AGM, but our participation rate is going to draw the wrath of the membership.
The CFC Constitutional Coalition ( a grassroots' CFC ordinary member group of about 40 members ) is going to consider a motion to impose a governor " activity rule ", and I feel it will be accepted and be brought forward in September. We deserve it ! In the past year, except for the critical first four restructuring motions, all other motions have had less than 50% voting, including the motions at the outgoing governors AGM ( even counting proxies ).
The deadwood among us must be rooted out. Inactive governors are parasites on the system. And the responsibility for this goes back first to the provincial associations who appoint some of us whom have no intention of governing, and ultimately to the CFC members in the provinces who elect the deadwood year after year.
We deserve it.
Bob "
As a governor trying to dialogue with ordinary members, I'll be interested in any comments you might have to make.
Bob
But my own posts are my own business. So if it is not on a confidential matter, and I think the membership would be interested to know that a certain discussion is taking place there, I will generally post it here.
On the following post, I have had 60 views. But only 1 governor has agreed with the post. There were 2 other posts on tangential issues, that were non-committal.
What do you think of the position I have taken in this post? What would you have expected as governor posting response?
Here is the post :
07-17-2009, 12:51 PM
Bob Armstrong
CFC Governor
CFC Governors Missing in Action
Posted on the members' CFC Chess Forum on July 14 by me:
" Monday also was important for the fact that the outgoing CFC governors held their AGM in the morning. Well, important to some people - the CFC President was not there, although he called in and answered questions by speakerphone for a few minutes; the VP was not there ( he was covering for his boss and couldn't get time off ); the Treasurer and Secretary and Junior Coordinator were not there. There were a grand total of 8 out of 61 governors present - and there were only 17 proxies sent in - a grand total of 25 governors of 61 checking in at the main meeting of the year. Something seems wrong with this picture. There were also 4 CFC ordinary members who attended.
Reports of some of the executive were filed, but for some there was no report ( not too good ). "
Very " not too good ".
We governors may have defeated the Motion 2009-14 to reduce the number of provincial representation governors by half at the AGM, but our participation rate is going to draw the wrath of the membership.
The CFC Constitutional Coalition ( a grassroots' CFC ordinary member group of about 40 members ) is going to consider a motion to impose a governor " activity rule ", and I feel it will be accepted and be brought forward in September. We deserve it ! In the past year, except for the critical first four restructuring motions, all other motions have had less than 50% voting, including the motions at the outgoing governors AGM ( even counting proxies ).
The deadwood among us must be rooted out. Inactive governors are parasites on the system. And the responsibility for this goes back first to the provincial associations who appoint some of us whom have no intention of governing, and ultimately to the CFC members in the provinces who elect the deadwood year after year.
We deserve it.
Bob "
As a governor trying to dialogue with ordinary members, I'll be interested in any comments you might have to make.
Bob