Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!DECUSERVE.DECUS.ORG!KILLEEN From: KILLEEN@DECUSERVE.DECUS.ORG (Jeff Killeen Exec Committee) Newsgroups: comp.org.decus Subject: FYI - From DECUServe Message-ID: <99D0BF51200037BB@decuserve.decus.org> Date: 2 May 91 04:05:00 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Lines: 65 <<< EISNER::DUA3:[NOTES$LIBRARY]SOAPBOX.NOTE;1 >>> -< DECUServe Soapbox >- ================================================================================ Note 340.138 The DECUS reorganization 138 of 145 EISNER::STONE_L "Larry Stone" 22 lines 1-MAY-1991 11:35 -< You need to convince me change is needed >- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am a firm believer in the "if it's not broke, don't fix it" philosophy. Accordingly, it is up to the PRO side to convince me that we have a situation that needs changing (I'll admit though, that many people will probably vote YES because that is what the Board recommends). Frankly, I am totally unconvinced there is a problem. Some PRO comments want us to think the CON people want to disenfranchise the rest of us. 1) I don't see support for this belief and 2) nobody ever said DECUS is supposed to be a governement-like democracy. Yes we can vote for some members of leadership but whether I can vote for all of them isn't that important. I vote with my membership - if DECUS isn't doing the job for me, I'll leave and I see no reason to leave at this time. What I see going on here is a problem I think a lot of volunteer organizations have - trying to organize it like a for profit corporation. Having served on the Board of a condominium homeowner's association, I have learned the people you most have to keep happy are your volunteers. So let's not worry about disenranchising the membership, worry about disenfranchising the volunteers. Without them, there is no DECUS and then there are no members which need to be served. ================================================================================ Note 340.139 The DECUS reorganization 139 of 145 EISNER::MAYTROTT "Laurie Maytrott, NLC/Southern RLC" 1 line 1-MAY-1991 14:29 -< I am voting NO. >- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As a DECUS member (Regional hat off, NLC hat off), I am voting NO. ================================================================================ Note 340.140 The DECUS reorganization 140 of 145 EISNER::BADDORF "Deb Baddorf" 7 lines 1-MAY-1991 14:40 -< Agreed. >- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > worry about disenfranchising the volunteers. Without them, > there is no DECUS and then there are no members which need to be > served. I agree. And since most of the volunteers which I can see here (i.e. ones who speak and thus contribute to what I get from DECUServe) are CON, I'll cast my vote with them. They are doing the work for me. ================================================================================ Note 340.141 The DECUS reorganization 141 of 145 EISNER::ZIMMERMAN "Comp-U-Card" 12 lines 1-MAY-1991 14:45 -< No, No, No Reorg. >- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It seems to me that ADL has little understanding of a volunteer organization. The proposal for reorganization resembles a business restructuring more than one related to a group of volunteers. I have been involved in a variety of groups ranging from local community groups to DECUS to Governmental entities to businesses. In my experience the structure which works the best for large volunteer groups like DECUS is more akin to an executive-legislative-judicial than a board of directors with ultimate power save that of electing it's members. Because of this fundemental difference in philosophy I will vote no (if I ever get my ballot).