From owner-constitution@andromeda.68k.org Wed Sep 3 22:54:33 1997 Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 00:53:08 -0500 From: owner-constitution-digest@lsmsaaa.org (LSMSAAA Constitution Digest) To: constitution-digest@68k.org Subject: LSMSAAA Constitution Digest V1 #7 Reply-To: constitution@andromeda.68k.org Sender: owner-constitution-digest@lsmsaaa.org Errors-To: owner-constitution-digest@lsmsaaa.org Precedence: bulk LSMSAAA Constitution Digest Thursday, September 4 1997 Volume 01 : Number 007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 09:44:06 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Newsletter costs > Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 20:41:07 -0500 > From: Rachel Hughes > Is the virtual constitution going on? Because if it is, Dr. Loftin or I > really need to be involved - this office is technically responsible for > LSMSAAA. Until this organization has reponsible officers, and is big > enough to be a separate entity, we have some say. Once it is viable to > stand on its own, it would really be best if it became a separate > organization. I would really love not to have to do the newsletter again. The VCC is going on. I thought Steve's message to lsmsa@lsmsaaa.org (and to announce) was pretty clear that *anyone* who wanted to participate could sign up. You are welcome to join in. Shall I add you (both of you?) to the constitution email list? Andre' - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 19:40:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss Subject: Virtual Constitutional Convention LSMSA alums, The LSMSA Alumni Association recently underwent a constitutional crisis because of several resignations and impeachments, and currently is operating with an interim set of officers who were elected by extraconstitutional means. Although the LSMSA seems in responsible hands with the acting executive council, led by President Kristy Zeringue Boxberger and Treasurer Micah Luftig (the only valid elected officer remaining), the recent mini-crisis has made clear that the current LSMSAAA constitution is inadequate. Former LSMSAAA officer Andre Dehon has proposed a Virtual Constitutional Convention to work out amendment proposals for consideration at the next LSMSAAA balloting, and asked me to chair the effort. The purpose of this message is to see who wants to help shape up the LSMSAAA charter by being a "delegate" to the Convention. How do you sign up? All you need to do is send me email. Since the VCC will not be operating in an official capacity (the LSMSAAA Constitution has no terms for a convention), but will really just be a working group to debate amendments, no elections or appointments are necessary. And since we will carry out all work by Internet, no limit to how many people get involved seems necessary. If you want to help, you can help. What's involved? As chair, I will structure the debate and keep track of the proposals. But the goal is to float potential amendments one at a time, and have the participants hammer them into an acceptable framework (or reject them altogether) after debate. So the only requirement for participating is that you be willing to receive loads of email (which, obviously, you always have the discretion of deleting from your system without reading). What happens after the VCC compiles a list of proposals? Even if you do not want to monitor any resulting debates, you will not be left out in the cold on the Convention. Not only do I encourage you to send any proposals for how the LSMSAAA should be changed (especially how its Constitution should be changed), you also will have chances to get involved later. After the committee composes a preliminary list of amendments, the following will happen: (1) We will post these suggestions to both the moderated and unmoderated mailing lists for additional comments and criticism (with your input sent to the Virtual Constitutional Convention so that it does not clog up the mail buffers for everyone else). (2) The VCC will edit the list of proposals further to incorporate any new insights. (3) Only then will a final draft of proposals be passed to the acting LSMSAAA officers for consideration. Under the terms of the old Constitution, the executive committee does not have to offer these amendments up to the LSMSAAA membership. So if you didn't like one, you could try to get it defeated at the relevant LSMSAAA meeting (in person or by proxy). (4) No amendment can pass without it being distributed to all LSMSAAA members as part of an election ballot. So if you are an active member, ultimately you get to vote on anything we compile. Why is a Virtual Constitutional Convention necessary? Paraphrasing Andre Dehon's initial appeal for the convention: In the past, amendments to the Constitution were tossed together by the LSMSAAA executive council with little time for consideration. Thus voting members were forced to make a decision between accepting flawed amendments or voting down well-intentioned efforts because of their flaws. The result is a disappointing LSMSAAA Constitution. With this new approach, the amendment proposals will have been refined greatly before anyone ever has to vote for/against them. This should make for a Constitution that is less susceptible to periods of confusion and breakdown. Let me know if you are interested or have other suggestions, and (if you've gotten to this point) thanks for reading a long messge. steve voss (class of 1986) - - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Stephen Voss (dsvoss@wjh.harvard.edu) Eat your beans, then some mutton, Department of Government, GSAS don't pee ... and go on looking Harvard University after you obsession! Oh! my hypothesis! M-38 Littauer Bldg. Oh! my fame! I shall be immortal! Immortal! Cambridge, MA 02138 Doktor (from Wozzeck) - - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 10:24:24 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Newsletter costs [Rachel - I know, the last thing you wanted to see if 5 messages from me. You're letter raised several points, each of which I felt, out of politeness and completeness, merited a separate reply. ] > Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 20:41:07 -0500 > From: Rachel Hughes > office was $291. I may be the current person from LSMSA coordinating the > LSMSAAA, but with my actual job, I cannot continue to do the newsletter on > my own. There needs to be a section of the constitution or the by-laws > that has something to do appointing the editor, > Read the above. We don't have any records from past years either. We > don't have time to do these little breakdowns. Ok, this raises two concerns for me. * The newsletter used to be the job of the corresponding secretary (I believe the constitution does provide for that). When I held the post, I prepared the newsletter -- including typesetting it. I delievered final, camera (xerox) ready copy to Cindy Allen for duplication, labelling, and postage. ...and that was at her request (I had visions of having to do those things myself and she volunteered that the school had the facilities to do duplication/labelling/postage easily). Something has changed between now and then. I am first to admit it needs to be fixed. Several people have commented that it is sad we lost the alumni newsletter as an independent entity. I always thought it was the school's desire which combined the two. Now that we know it is not the school's desire, we can, more adamently, lobby for their separation. Anyway, this is not a constitutional problem, since the constitution already proscribes an alumni newsletter (not a joint alumni/parent newsletter) with an officer (corresponding sect.) responsible for getting it assembled. Nonetheless, I'll take your feedback to say you think the way the constitution currently describes things is the way it *should* be and we should not change the constitution to reflect the way things have been done during the past few years. * I cannot imagine any duties of the treasurer more important than keeping track of the revenues and expenditures on the association's funds. Given that, I would expect, at the very least, a yearly line item on the cost for newsletters (and preferably, a cost for each mailing/newsleter). If such records do not exist, then this is a serious problem. You're point may be that no treasurer has ever done his job. ---> IF SO, THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS PROBLEM AND WE SHOULD ALL KNOW ABOUT IT. thanks, Andre' ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 12:05:06 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [MAILER-DAEMON@growl.CS.Berkeley.EDU: Returned mail: User unknown] Original To: constitution@lsmsaaa.org, constituation@68k.org Cc: Rachel Hughes Contents: 1) a collection of edited facts from Rachel 2) some estimates I made My conclusion: $1 / cheap 10p newsletter (see bottom) Andre' - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 20:41:07 -0500 From: Rachel Hughes I don't think we've ever really paid for the printing, and since we (read that to mean the Mrs. Allen's secretary for years, and me last year) here have always done the grunt work - labeling, etc., that's not a big cost either. The Parent's Association paid for the printing for the May issue. Depending on when we send out this fall's issue, the Foundation may pay postage. All we've ever really paid is postage, and that cost changes every year. It depends on how many are being sent out, we add approx. 180 every year with the newest alums, and how many pages (their weight). We sent out approx. 2300 newsletters in May, and the amount we paid the post office was $291. I may be the current person from LSMSA coordinating the LSMSAAA, but with my actual job, I cannot continue to do the newsletter on my own. There needs to be a section of the constitution or the by-laws that has something to do appointing the editor, and that the officers have to have some responsibilities as to the labeling and prep for mailing. Prepping the newsletter for mailing once it got here from the printers took me a week.....because I couldn't spend every waking minute doing it. . . . . We don't have any records from past years either. We don't have time to do these little breakdowns. . . . . Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 00:09:24 -0500 From: Rachel Hughes . . . . We give the articles, pictures, etc., for the newsletter to the printers; they typeset it for us, we proof it, and then it is printed. After the printing is done, we pay for it (or rather, the parent's association has paid for it). We do not have a breakdown from the printers of the cost. I do know that it wasn't all that high last year. The total cost for printing 2600 newsletters was less than $900. That including the services of the typesetter, etc. Rachel . . . . Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 00:13:49 -0500 From: Rachel Hughes The labels and toner have always been "donated" by the school. We don't use stamps. There has always been an imprint (non-profit, bulk rate). And our labor was also "donated" - although this could be handled by alumni. If several alums would give of their time, it would cut the time to get it done significantly. We will have no choice but to do some things differently in the future, anyway. New postal regulations that will go into effect January 1 will make more work for anyone who does big mailouts. Rachel - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >From amd@growl.CS.Berkeley.EDU Sun Aug 31 20:01:37 1997 Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 20:01:18 -0700 (PDT) We can do a rough estimate ourselves: postage 0.5x (less than 32x2, as I recall) (less when mailing bulk rate -- that's what I don't know) copying 0.05/page envelopes 0.25 (optional) address labels 0.10 each (guess) handling 0.10 ??? (fold/stamp/label) (100/hr at $10/hr ??) 10p --> $1.25-1.50 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9/2 --> revising postage for Rachel's $291/2300=13cents/copy number goes to 0.13+0.50+0.10+0.10=$0.83 ... call it a dollar for now. Andre' - --LAA21547.873226373/growl.CS.Berkeley.EDU-- - ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 21:40:45 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [amd@CS.Berkeley.EDU: [hughesr@alpha.nsula: Re: Newsletter costs]] ...still not quite fixed... - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 20:38:51 -0700 (PDT) To: constitution@lsmsaaa.org Subject: [hughesr@alpha.nsula: Re: Newsletter costs] From: "Andre' DeHon" Reply-To: "Andre' DeHon" Organization: UC Berkeley BRASS X-face: zXx,|&]HuS;w?NU71cDc=Q}P`'1 JvDDtN[*09(DjFxt<&rg',Nz"|5#Bv<,H8?e"Y]S>8V=F4&wP6NO/! |H~lYV'++i9#G`?qx$0G^i|+M|WNt[yF5W#*>%X[NW0" Here's some input from Rachel in response to one of my recent messages which is probably useful for all of us to see. (BTW - Rachel has joined us on this list.) Andre' Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 01:59:53 -0500 From: Rachel Hughes [in response to my comment about the newsletter responsibility belonging to the Corr. sect.] I don't know when we started having all of the typesetting, etc., done elsewhere, but it may have been a result of it becoming a larger document, and we wanted it to be less hassle. The cost for the actual typesetting is not so large that I would consider it wasteful. In fact, it probably saves time in the long run to have it professionally done. The actual duplication hasn't been done here in several years for the same reason. We don't have the capabilities of producing a professional looking document. The parent's association and school (other than Mrs. Allen, Mrs. Moore, myself and Dr. Loftin) have not had anything to do with what went into the newsletter, they just helped us to pay for it, and we sent it to alumni parents as well as alums. We should ask ourselves if we want to continue paying to send it to alumni parents, or if we just want to send it to alumni. (Should that be in the by-laws?) > with an officer (corresponding sect.) responsible for getting it assembled. I would suggest that we require that the corr. sec. be from within driving distance to Natchitoches so that he/she can meet with us frequently (face to face). That way the facilities we do have are available for their use. Also, since it has gotten to be quite a large project, maybe we should also include an assistant editor of the newsletter in the by-laws. Anyway - - I did it last time, because there were no officers other than treasurer. I don't think that the treasurer has had a lot of responsibility lately. Once the constitution is hammered out, and genuine elections held, the executive board needs to decide what do with the account. It's been hard for the treasurer to keep track of the money, because it's in a joint account with the parents association funds. Also, since we haven't paid for the printing of the newsletter in years, that has never been a line item - only the postage for the mailing. I don't know if the official position of the school is for the alumni association to stand alone, but I do know that it has been the private goal for the coordinators. I think it should be a separate, viable organization so that the school has absolutley no say in what it does. I know that the alumni association at my graduate school is separate - they have a building on campus, but they operate independently of the university. They raise millions of dollars annually to support university programs and scholarships, and I think we could do something like that on a smaller scale. I mean, we're never going to have 100,000 graduates of whom several thousand are quite wealthy and influential, but we do all right, and I would like to see us in a position to help fund student organizations' activities, or help financially strapped students who don't quite qualify for a waiver. - ------- End of forwarded message ------- - ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 08:35:35 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [voss1@fas.harvard.edu: Treasury] - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 11:30:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss To: Rachel Hughes cc: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Treasury In-Reply-To: <199709030440.VAA21747@growl.CS.Berkeley.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 2 Sep 1997, Andre' DeHon wrote: > I would suggest that we require that the corr. sec. be from within > driving distance to Natchitoches so that he/she can meet with us frequently > (face to face). Part of the problem with the current LSMSAAA is that the available pool of officers only consists of those people within convenient distance to Natchitoches. One of my goals is to limit dependence on those few people, not to increase it. To your mind, Rachel, which LSMSAAA activities must be performed in Natchitoches itself? > It's been hard > for the treasurer to keep track of the money, because it's in a joint > account with the parents association funds. Could you tell us what the LSMSAAA currently must do to spend money? (Or is no procedure in place, since the only line item has been newsletter postage?) > I think it should be a separate, viable organization > so that the school has absolutley no say in what it does. That's been my goal from the beginning, although I think that it's one elected officers (rather than a constitutional convention) should pursue. steve - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Stephen Voss (dsvoss@wjh.harvard.edu) Eat your beans, then some mutton, Department of Government, GSAS don't pee ... and go on looking Harvard University after you obsession! Oh! my hypothesis! M-38 Littauer Bldg. Oh! my fame! I shall be immortal! Immortal! Cambridge, MA 02138 Doktor (from Wozzeck) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:38:48 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Rachel comments - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 20:42:54 -0500 From: Rachel Hughes To: voss1@fas.harvard.edu Subject: August 11 digest >> > 2.1 Types of Membership >> > The LSMSAAA will have five levels of membership, as follows: >> > (a) Inactive Member - Any member of the LSMSAAA who has not paid dues for the fiscal year, according to the requirements of Article 3 below. >> > (b) Adjunct Member - Any member of the LSMSAAA who is not a graduate of the Louisiana School but has met the dues requirements (regular or lifetime) of Article 3 below. >> Are we going to allow current students in? I don't think they need to be in the alumni association because they are still in school. We have also never kept the records of people who haven't graduated. We have no information on the multitudes who came here for a while and then never graduated. We have absolutely no way of contacting them. We may have some records for the last one or two years, but from 1983-1994 was destroyed long ago. The only people in the database that is maintained here at the school are those who actually graduated. >> What's the purpose of this distinction? It seems to codify what must happen. I guess this makes explicit that it is the individual member's responsibility to keep the origanization updated with theiraddress (rather than the organization's to keep track of the individuals). If that's the case, maybe we should start it out by saying such. I absolutely agree that the onus for maintaining contact should be placed upon the individual, not the organization. It is much easier for one person to call with an update, than for us to track down 200 people. I think that it wouldn't hurt for us to continue to print the names of people who've lost contact in one issue of the newsletter each year. Many times they have remained in contact with a classmate, and through that classmate learn that we do not have an address for them, and they then call us. >> "Recording Secretary" -- are we reverting to two secretaries? or are we now calling the one secretary recording? This information you say a "recording secretary" would maintain has always been maintained here. I think it should remain at LSMSA, if only for the fact that we will have new officers every two to four years (depending on what the new constitution specifies) and it would be difficult for a database with this much information to be shunted about all the time. Besides, there are many times that we here need to access the database to locate a specific person. Steve- Andre' added me yesterday, and I know this a few weeks late, but I hope you take these thoughts into consideration. Rachel 9/3/97 - ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:39:57 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [voss1@fas.harvard.edu: Re: August 11 digest] - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 11:52:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss Reply-To: Dennis Voss To: Rachel Hughes cc: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: August 11 digest In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970902204254.0069ea48@alpha.nsula.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 2 Sep 1997, Rachel Hughes wrote: > Are we going to allow current students in? Technically they meet the description of members, and if any one person gets the strange desire to join early I can't think of any reason for banning that in the Constitution (can you?). But I doubt any LSMSAAA Executive Council will try to enlist them until they graduate. > We have also > never kept the records of people who haven't graduated. We have no > information on the multitudes who came here for a while and then never > graduated. We have absolutely no way of contacting them. Since the LSMSAAA will have no responsibility for contacting people who do not provide their locations first, this shouldn't be a problem. > This information you say a "recording secretary" would maintain has always > been maintained here. I think it should remain at LSMSA, if only for the > fact that we will have new officers every two to four years Remember, I am trying to construct a Constitution that allows the LSMSAAA to be independent of LSMSA. If the LSMSAAA officers are dependent on you for their own membership database, then they certainly are not independent. > Besides, there are many times that we here need to access the database to > locate a specific person. There's no reason LSMSA shouldn't maintain a database of graduates. Indeed, I would hope that LSMSA and LSMSAAA would trade off addresses periodically. And if the two groups wish to cooperate, the LSMSA and LSMSAAA could jointly send out a publication. But the organization certainly should keep track of its active members for itself -- that's all we're requiring. Incidentally, most spreadsheet and database formats are quite portable these days. In an emergency, they even can spit out what's called ASCII text, which goes just about anywhere. So tranfer from officer to officer will not be a problem unless one officer simply drops out of sight. > Steve- Andre' added me yesterday, and I know this a few weeks late, but I > hope you take these thoughts into consideration. Welcome to the VCC! steve - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Stephen Voss (dsvoss@wjh.harvard.edu) Eat your beans, then some mutton, Department of Government, GSAS don't pee ... and go on looking Harvard University after you obsession! Oh! my hypothesis! M-38 Littauer Bldg. Oh! my fame! I shall be immortal! Immortal! Cambridge, MA 02138 Doktor (from Wozzeck) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:43:33 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [voss1@fas.harvard.edu: Re: Treasury (fwd)] - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:16:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss To: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Treasury (fwd) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Another for the VCC. steve - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Stephen Voss (dsvoss@wjh.harvard.edu) Eat your beans, then some mutton, Department of Government, GSAS don't pee ... and go on looking Harvard University after you obsession! Oh! my hypothesis! M-38 Littauer Bldg. Oh! my fame! I shall be immortal! Immortal! Cambridge, MA 02138 Doktor (from Wozzeck) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 23:06:41 -0500 From: Rachel Hughes To: Dennis Voss Subject: Re: Treasury To your mind, Rachel, which LSMSAAA activities must >be performed in Natchitoches itself? I wasn't thinking of specific activities, but that currently the database and accounts are housed here, and although that can be changed, having them here provides stability even when officers change. Also, the current structure is that through the External Affairs office, Dr. Loftin and I are the advisors, or coordinators, of the LSMSAAA, and we would like to be able to meet with the officers face to face occasionally. >Could you tell us what the LSMSAAA currently must do to spend money? (Or is no procedure in place, since the only line item has been newsletter postage?) The reason our money is in with the Parent's Assoc. is that they have so much money, that the interest generated covers all monthly fees. Therefore, our little bit doesn't get eaten up with the killer bank fees. Since it is a conflict of interest (according to the state auditor) for an LSMSA employee to sign checks, a representative of the Parent's Assoc. is authorized to sign checks out of the account. We submit a request and a check is written. An account could still be housed here in Natchitoches, it doesn't really matter where...I just think we need to have it separated from the Parent's Association. The treasurer could keep the check book, and have all statements sent to him/her. To get a check, the advisor, or reunion coordinator, etc. could call with a request, fax a request or e-mail a request, along with justification. The check could then be sent directly to the receiving party by the treasurer. The biggest money eater is also our most well-attended event - the reception following graduation. However, none of the food goes to waste - we ate all of it this year. There were a good 300 people at the reception, too. We have also helped the reunion planners get started by providing seed money - for mailouts, deposits, etc. However, we should probably proscribe some guidelines in the by-laws. Those can be hammered out later, though. Whew...sorry for talking your eyes blurry! Rachel - ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:44:32 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [voss1@husc.harvard.edu: Re: Treasury] - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:28:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss To: Rachel Hughes cc: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Treasury In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970902230641.006a3398@alpha.nsula.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 2 Sep 1997, Rachel Hughes wrote: > I wasn't thinking of specific activities, but that currently the database > and accounts are housed here, and although that can be changed, having them > here provides stability even when officers change. Again, this runs against our desire for the LSMSAAA to be independent. The goal, eventually, is to have the organization managing its own money, its own publications, and its own database. So we don't want to formulate a structure that assumes the money and database are held by the school. My current draft permits, but does not require, that the accounts be kept by LSMSA. > The treasurer could keep the check book, > and have all statements sent to him/her. OK, good, this is really helpful. Your proposal here is exactly what I toyed with, but I was worried about the inordinate amount of trust it required one to have in the Treasurer ($2,000 could seem like a lot of money). Reading your description, though, the current system requires just as much trust in a single officer of the Parents' Association -- so switching to this system is no more dangerous than what is currently in place. Indeed, it is safer, since it splits the LSMSAAA money and the Parents Association money into two places. All of your details on *what* the money pays for probably need not concern the VCC (aside from newsletter costs, since we plan to *require* periodic communications to the active membership). As long as we empower the LSMSAAA Executive Council to make spending decisions, we can leave that to the elected folk. steve - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Stephen Voss (dsvoss@wjh.harvard.edu) Eat your beans, then some mutton, Department of Government, GSAS don't pee ... and go on looking Harvard University after you obsession! Oh! my hypothesis! M-38 Littauer Bldg. Oh! my fame! I shall be immortal! Immortal! Cambridge, MA 02138 Doktor (from Wozzeck) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:57:12 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Treasury The "Right Thing" to do with the database is to put it online on a network accessible computer (password protected, etc.). Once it's online, physical access/locallity is not an important issue. Longer term I have visions of setting it up so people can update their own addresses. Short term it can just be on a computer with access by whomever the EC designates [appropriate people at school, corresponding secretary, etc.]. *Both* sides can update the database and *both* sides can get access to it. When the officers change, we just change the passwords (or, more likely, create new accounts...maybe removing old ones). Of course, both the corresponding sect. and an agent at the school should make their own backups of the database to protect against any crashes or destructive intrusions. [ Isn't technology wonderful? :-) ] Andre' > Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:28:12 -0400 (EDT) > From: Dennis Voss > > > I wasn't thinking of specific activities, but that currently the database > > and accounts are housed here, and although that can be changed, having them > > here provides stability even when officers change. > > Again, this runs against our desire for the LSMSAAA to be independent. > The goal, eventually, is to have the organization managing its own money, > its own publications, and its own database. So we don't want to formulate > a structure that assumes the money and database are held by the school. > My current draft permits, but does not require, that the accounts be kept by > LSMSA. > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 13:02:53 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: August 11 digest With a central, online database, if the officer drops out, we still have the master database. Only problem we have is if everyone with access/responsibility over the database disappears: * agent(s) at LSMSA (and their backups) * officer(s) w/ access (and their backups) * technical people running machine (who should also be making backups which include the database) Further, if these people are geographically distributed, we even have safeguards against major disasters. :-) [I had an MIT associate who used to keep one copy on a machine on in Boston and one on a machine in California. He felt that if anything happened which simultaneously took out BOTH the East and West coast, he probably wouldn't be around to have any need further need for the data.] Andre' > > Besides, there are many times that we here need to access the database to > > locate a specific person. > > There's no reason LSMSA shouldn't maintain a database of graduates. > Indeed, I would hope that LSMSA and LSMSAAA would trade off addresses > periodically. And if the two groups wish to cooperate, the LSMSA and > LSMSAAA could jointly send out a publication. But the organization > certainly should keep track of its active members for itself -- that's all > we're requiring. > > Incidentally, most spreadsheet and database formats are quite portable > these days. In an emergency, they even can spit out what's called ASCII > text, which goes just about anywhere. So tranfer from officer to officer > will not be a problem unless one officer simply drops out of sight. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 13:04:26 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: August 11 digest (fwd) > >> What's the purpose of this distinction? It seems to codify what must > happen. I guess this makes explicit that it is the individual member's > responsibility to keep the origanization updated with theiraddress (rather > than the organization's to keep track of the individuals). If that's the > case, maybe we should start it out by saying such. > > I absolutely agree that the onus for maintaining contact should be placed > upon the individual, not the organization. It is much easier for one > person to call with an update, than for us to track down 200 people. I > think that it wouldn't hurt for us to continue to print the names of people > who've lost contact in one issue of the newsletter each year. Many times > they have remained in contact with a classmate, and through that classmate > learn that we do not have an address for them, and they then call us. Friendly amendment: list should (also) be posted online (web site). Andre' ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 22:28:51 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: [hughesr@alpha.nsula: Re: Newsletter costs] > Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 01:59:53 -0500 > From: Rachel Hughes > > > I would suggest that we require that the corr. sec. be from within > driving distance to Natchitoches so that he/she can meet with us frequently > (face to face). That way the facilities we do have are available for their > use. Also, since it has gotten to be quite a large project, maybe we should > also include an assistant editor of the newsletter in the by-laws. Anyway > - I did it last time, because there were no officers other than treasurer. Not to sound like a broken record, but the newsletter can also be prepared online. Multiple people in distributed location can collaborate in preparing a single document. I'm not sure there is a need to constitutionally specify additional help for the corresponding sect. However, it probably makes sense to think of the corr. sect. more like a "cabinet" officer who will appoint/recruit his/her own staff. One idea I've had for a while is that we should probably try recruiting "class correspondents". The class corr. can take charge of trying to get information from their respective class for the newsletter (verifying it, etc.). This seems like a natural way to distribute the work - --- additionally, I suspect individuals will be more comfortable sending their latest news (accomplishments, etc.) to a familiar person rather than to someone they don't know. Andre' ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 22:53:41 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: please forward > On Sun, 31 Aug 1997, Andre' DeHon wrote: > > > If the organization continues to be tied to LSMSA, it might be > > expedient to tie it's fiscal year to LSMSAs (which probably means, in turn, > > the states?). > > I'm not sure what advantage this would have. Isn't the ebb and flow of > LSMSA's fiscal year fairly transparent to the LSMSAAA even now? *If* LSMSA charged LSMSAAA for services (or shared the costs with LSMSAAA for things), it might be more convenient to have the two together. >From my experience with administrative entities, the begin/end of fiscal year's (quarters) is pretty important and tends to be a forcing function for reconciling many kinds of outstanding transactions. Given that, I'm imagining it would be easier if the two were in synch *if* they were tightly coupled in opertion. We've now learned that the LSMSAAA account is currently shared with the Parent's association...so maybe this is less of an issue. > > This will force semi-regular "amendments" to keep the organization > > running. > > Yes, precisely what I intended. Think of the periodic cost-of-living > increase as a vote of confidence for the organization (rather than for any > given officer, which is what elections are for). I am proposing that we > require a supermajority to pass dues increases, which of course is a > conservative budgeting principle. > > Another place you could require a vote to raise dues is the "General > Assembly" (my name for the periodic membership meetings). Since these > have consistent attendance problems, though, I didn't want to give them > many responsibilities other than impeachment and overriding vetoes. > > Or you could write a specific provision for deciding dues, rather than > piggybacking on either the amendment process or the Gen. Assembly. I think I was advocating this last point. While I see the wisdom in requiring a supermajority for for passing these increases, I'm not completely certain it wants to be of the same level (conceptually at least, if not in practice) as a constitutional amendment. I'd like to hear what other delegates think about this point. > > I always assumed that the money (part of the money) paid above the baseline > > dues rate for a supporting/lifetime member served to "endow" postage. > > I believe the original amounts were $7 and $15. After 10 years as a > > supporting member, you've put in an extra $80. Assuming this is put into > > savings at a mere 5% interest, this yields $4/year == twice the $2/year > > postage proposal. > > My arguments against this paragraph: > (1) The difference is between $15 and $10 now. ??? I'm advocating we set the amount so that it works. i.e. make it $10 and $20 if that's what it takes to make it work. > (2) I don't think the LSMSAAA invests the money. Maybe it should and we should be thinking about this. > (3) Since we don't stop them from spending your dues, we can't assume a > given pool of officers will have it available 10 years later. So your > advance payment doesn't prevent a constitutional crisis. Assuming the officers have good intentions, perhaps, if we figure something like this out, we could articulate the intent. ...assuming they are completely malicious, we could try to specify it tightly...but I'm sure nothing is air-tight...(esp. since we can't perfectly predict ROI) > (4) I estimate that all the money is gone 7-8 years after reaching > Lifetime Membership, so even if the Executive Committee followed > careful budgeting practices the "entitled" group could grow beyond > the ability of reasonable dues to cover. [I put the logic at the bottom, > so you could adjust for any fallacious assumptions I might have made.] You make a different (and inconstitent) assumption than I do. I say it's inconsistent, because it is inconsitent with your postal proposal. You assume that money is depleted at the rate of non-supporting dues per year. I assumed that money was depleted at the rate of postal costs per year. If you feel the organization is viable if lifetime members only pay to cover postal costs for the time beyond their initial membership period (and we assume any positive rate above inflation yield), I assert that there is a level of fees I can pick such that the money paid in by the lifetime members will yield to cover postal rates indefinitely. [For that matter, if we pick the numbers right, we can make it yield to cover full yearly dues...but that might start getting a bit high.] > So I may not have persuaded you, but at least you have an extended defense > of breaking the postal fees out. The postal fees seem like a nuisance to track (both for the organization and the individual). Just putting a 0.32 stamp to mail a $2 check is starting to get marginal...before we start considering the handling costs at both ends. ...back it off to every 5 or 10 years, and maybe it gets a bit more pallatable...but I'm still uncomfortable with the idea. Andre' ------------------------------ End of LSMSAAA Constitution Digest V1 #7 ****************************************