Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!dsinc!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Feedback to the Forth Interest Group
Message-ID: <2410.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 27 Feb 91 03:08:25 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 59

Category 1,  Topic 2
Message 109       Sun Feb 24, 1991
D.RUFFER [Dennis]            at 22:26 EST
 
Frank, thank you for reminding us what volunteerism is all about.  I could not
agree more.  No, I do not expect everyone to agree with my opinions, and will
gladly discuss them.  I will also gladly accept anything you want to
volunteer.  Jack is correct, that Kent is not being paid to verify the
chapters.  If you can help us correct the contact information for Austin, it
would be greatly appreciated.

I too would prefer a "hellraiser" for Chapter Coordinator to no Chapter
Coordinator, but the Board of Directors has voted on this issue and as a
fellow Director, I stand by their decision.  I was the one who made the
suggestion for a hearing, but it was pointed out that I was out of line on two
points.  First, the Chapter Coordinator is an appointment made by the
President and he can withdraw that appointment at any time.  He did, however,
choose to allow the other Board members to vote on the matter.

The second point comes from my misuse of Robert's Rules of Order. Under
Disciplinary Procedures, Offenses Elsewhere than in a Meeting; Trials, it
states the following:

"If improper conduct by a member of a society occurs elsewhere than at a
meeting, the members generally have no first-hand knowledge of the case. 
Therefore, if disciplinary action is to be taken, charges must be preferred
and a formal trial held..."

Well, although Jack's actions were not done during a meeting, they were all
made publicly and we all knew precisely what he did.  There was no need for
charges to be brought against him.  Thus there was no need for him to be given
the chance to defend himself against any charges.  The facts were self evident
in this case.  There was no hearing and there were no accusations.  The Board
voted on the public evidence (most of which is still here today).

Therefore, on both points, I was out of line even to suggest that a hearing be
called, and the Board of Directors had no desire to give Jack a forum for him
to bash us even further.  We merely voted to remove an appointment that was
not serving its purpose.

I really hope you do take the time to go to Rochester Frank.  The contrast to
FORML is quite remarkable and it should give you added insight into the Forth
industry as a whole.

I did not say that FIG is completely worry free financially.  Of course, as
our membership drops, we have to take steps to keep ourselves in business. 
Raising rates is one step and others are in progress.  I also will say that I
am very concerned about why people are not renewing their memberships to FIG
and I always take the time to ask.  Where there is a problem I can solve, I do
my best to do so, but as you have said very well, I am just another volunteer.
At the moment, a VERY over committed volunteer with many plates in the fire. 
I do what I can, but the toits have been very sparse as of late.

DaR
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp