[sac-board] Re: Waivers

 
Jeff, see my answers below.

On an observing topic it looks like the weather will clear up for the next
few days.  You just might know it is cloudy on the weekend we can use
telescopes and clear afterwards.  How fortunate you are to have a backyard
observatory to enjoy observing so frequently.

Clear skies and please keep posting your observations as I look forward to
them,
aj

Jeff Hopkins wrote:
Hello AJ, I understand your feelings on this, but I also feel that since
muchhas been said about waivers, those issues will surface again. Most
likelyat the meeting. Questions: Is the vote regarding the amendment
strictlyyes or no for the current wording? The is correct, we will vote yes
or no.
Can the wording be changed before a vote? No, we went throgh quite a bit of
discussion and change from the prototype to what was printed in the
newsletter.  We shouldn't change it before the vote.
Will the vote be allowed to determine if there is an amendment? If I
understand what you are asking then yes.  Actually there are several
amendments and, as I understand, they will all be voted on.  So either they
will all pass or all fail.  Can someone confirm this for us.
It seems voting on an amendment may be premature. There is still much
discussion on whether or not to have waivers this the amendment, not just
thewording. Please see Thad's prior message.
I do not want to see waivers so for me the wording is not the issue. The
issue for me is not to have waivers, period. Based on this I strongly
recomend you vote against the amendment regardless of what I, or anyone else
for that matter, have to say.  It is your, and all of us, constutionaly
rightand I strongly support that - regardless of our differences.
I feel if the amendment is passed, there are likely to be additions to it.
Infact, if there are not additions, then again waivers make no sense. Thus
all these issue are important and worthy of discussion. What kind of
additions do you think will be required?  I think the wording is very
accurate and am well pleased with the work Paul and others (wish I know
everyone's names - sorry) did getting the wording.
I have yet to see a list of pros for the waivers. I though that is what has
been transpiring for the last three or two months.
From the August Newsletter: "Article VI: Expulsion of Members and
Impeachmentof Elected Officers A. A member may be dropped or expelled from
the Saguaro Astronomy Club for any of the following reasons: 5. Attending a
club event, that requires a signed release, and refusing to sign the release
for the event." We are back to kicking out members. Or not attending club
events. Really great! If a member wants to attend an event, but does not
wantto sign his rights away, he or she must either not attend, attend and
sign his or her rights away or not sign and be dragged before the tribunal.
Which is worse, being dropped or expelled? If dropped, from what height?
Doesthe member have a choice of punishment? Article VI has been around for
some time and no one has been kicked out - at least as long as I have been a
member of SAC and that goes back to 1980.  A formal process is described and
I don't think it easy - at all - to kick someone out.
Will there be a formal hearing where the to-be-expelled/dropped member is
dragged before a tribunal, accused and then cast out or dropped, stripped of
his or her membership card, never to proudly hold his or her head again and
declare "I am a SAC member?" Since there is no membership chairman does this
mean poor Al must be the ax man? See my comment above.
"Article XII: Club Activities A: A club event is only one occurring on the
day, time, and place that the Board of Directors formally specifies. B:
Participants at club events are only those who are: 1. members or invited
guests and 2. who also have signed the release for the event, when a release
is required." XII A. Certainly need some clarification. A club event is only
one "what" occurring? XII B. What if someone shows up who is not a member or
"invited guest?" Heaven forbid, an ex-member. What if an invited guest or
guest not invited refuses to sign a waiver? Stone the closest member? Make
note and never let that person be a member of SAC? What will you do? For
members who do not want to sign, they will need to avoid these events or
giveup their membership. Is someone who shows up, does not sign a waiver yet
still does observing okay, just not a participant? A member or guest who
doesn't sign is not considered a participant? Does that mean they will not
beallowed to enjoy their observing? What is the penalty for not being a
participant? Remember, Astronomy used to be fun. All welcome! I'm headed to
Chinle on Tuesday to give two star parties (Tuesday and Wednesday nights)
andpresent six presentations on astronomy to the high school. No waivers
required! I'll be back Thursday in time to prepare for Friday. BTW, don't
worry, I'll make sure they understand those activities are NOT SAC events. A
suggestion for the next meeting. Print up the amendment, list the pros and
cons that have been stated (if there are any pros). Hand out the copies to
the membership before any discussion. This should save time and avoid any
misunderstanding. Jeff At 19:50 -0700 9/9/05, AJ Crayon wrote: Jeff, the
August newsletter is the only newsletter that has the wording for the
amendments that we have been discussing. Do not, repeat do not, use any
priornewsletter as a reference. Also do not, repeat do not, use any
statements made in this or any other e-mail list that is contrary to what is
in the August newsletter. I have tried, or at least believe I have tried,
todirect everyone to that document as a reference for discussion as there
have been a number of false statement about the issue. Hope this helps, aj

Other related posts: