From owner-constitution@andromeda.68k.org Thu Sep 4 10:56:26 1997 Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 12:54:35 -0500 From: owner-constitution-digest@lsmsaaa.org (LSMSAAA Constitution Digest) To: constitution-digest@68k.org Subject: LSMSAAA Constitution Digest V1 #9 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 009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 20:44:07 -0500 From: Rachel Hughes Subject: Re: Sec. 3 -- Dues >> 3.1 Postal Fees >> Any member of the LSMSAAA, regardless of status, may opt to receive communications from the association through postal rather than electronic media. Should a member of the LSMSAAA opt for postal communications, an additional fee of $2 annually is required to defray costs. ? I don't know how many people out of 2300 graduates are going to opt for electronic communications. There are many of us who only have access to the internet through our jobs or school. If I didn't have Netscape or e-mail through work, I would have absolutely no access. Of those who have access at work, how many would be allowed to, or feel comfortable getting personal mail at work? I know several people who aren't allowed to use their employers' systems for anything other than job-related messages. Many places monitor employees e-mail and internet usage. While many of us are connected, there is still a substantial portion of alumni who DO NOT have access at all. When people have called to ask about reunions, or to update their addresses, I always ask if they have e-mail, and you would be surprised at the number who don't even know how to use e-mail. Remember - the whole world isn't connected - yet. Rachel ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 12:38:33 -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: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 20:38:51 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [hughesr@alpha.nsula: Re: Newsletter costs] 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 ------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 11:51:09 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Newsletter Costs 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' ------------------------------ 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 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: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 21:57:07 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Sec. 3 -- Dues > (1) It will define the year for which dues must be paid. (If I > remember correctly, the old LSMSAAA constitution does not specify > when "annual dues" cover.) I have not decided, though, what > dates should define the fiscal year. I'm hoping others can make > a suggestion. One option, of course, is the calendar year (which > is probably the practice of the current LSMSAAA). But another > would coincide with elections, so that new officers would come in > at the start of a new budget. 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?). Alternately, if the graduation-weekend business meeting continues to be the only, annual, association-wide meeting, it might be nice to have the books close a few months before that so that a timely and meaningful report can be made at that time. > (2) I lock dues rates constitutionally, rather than allowing the > Executive Council to set dues at will. Seems strange allowing > elected officers to determine the poll tax required for someone > to vote against them in a coming election. I agree with the sentiment that there should be some checks and balances to control dues (and notification, etc.), but locking a single figure in the constitutio also seems short-sighted. ...If for no other reason than that, until we conquer inflation, the dues will effectively decrease each year... This will force semi-regular "amendments" to keep the organization running. Maybe there's no choice but to vote regularly to accept dues increases, but even so, I'm not sure that wants to be the same level as a constitutional amendment. > (3) A trial balloon: I propose pulling postal fees apart from > dues. Thus, an LSMSAAA member who agrees to receive all > communications electronically will pay less, and even Lifetime > Members who demand postal communications must help pay for those. > Why am I suggesting this? Aside from the obvious -- encouraging > people not to waste paper and saving the LSMSAAA postal costs -- > I have an overriding constitutional reason. In future sections I > intend to require (rather than merely permit) periodic > communications from the LSMSAAA Executive Council to the LSMSAAA > Membership. But unless the Constitution provides a sound way to > ensure that the LSMSAAA has adequate funds for this, we risk > writing a constitutional crisis into the document. Allowing a > growing pool of people who have the right to receive postal > communications yet pay nothing eventually would create a fiscal > or constitutional collapse (or, alternately, require increasing > dues for future LSMSA classes). A final note on this proposal: I > am not wedded to it, and encourage others to find a better > solution that accomplishes the same goal, and especially do not > intend the $2 amount as the final word since I did not consult > with past or present LSMSAAA officers before setting it. Hmm, let me make an assumption I've been making explicit. 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. So, I consider it reasonable to set the supporting member / lifetime fees such that this gets covered. What else did people have in mind to do with the extra money provided by supporting/lifetime members? Perhaps, if we're going to set these values rationally, we should work back from what we're using the revenues to cover. Personally, my biggest concern is with the overhead transaction cost (my time) of having to pay a regular fee v/s being able to just get it over with all at once. ...oh, and if I opt. for non-postal as a lifetime member, can my communcations/postal-endowment yield money to pay for server support? (nameserver fees, disk upgrades, backups....) > (4) I protect the LSMSAAA membership from retroactive rate > increases, and especially protect LSMSAAA Lifetime Members. good, though you're wording probably needs to be tightened > 3. DUES > Members of the LSMSAAA who wish to activate their status for a > given fiscal year must submit dues for that year to the LSMSAAA > Treasurer, as specified in the annual report (see ...). The > fiscal year runs from [date] to [date]. Lifetime Members no > longer need to pay dues to retain their active status, but may > have to pay postal fees (as discussed in Article 3 Section 1 > below). [so I advocate changing the due structure to lose the ", but may..." clause. ] > (a) The rate for "regular dues" is $8 annually, paid to the > LSMSAAA Treasurer for a given fiscal year. > (b) The rate for "lifetime dues" is $13 annually, paid to > the LSMSA Treasurer for a given fiscal year. Pro-rated dues? I don't see that much need to allow it, but we might want to state one way or the other (now that we are going to define the fiscal year percisely, people will want to know what happens if they want to join half way through the year). > 3.1 Postal Fees > Any member of the LSMSAAA, regardless of status, may opt to > receive communications from the association through postal rather > than electronic media. Should a member of the LSMSAAA opt for > postal communications, an additional fee of $2 annually is > required to defray costs. This $2 annual charge may be paid to > the LSMSAAA Treasurer along with any other dues, or may be paid > to the LSMSAAA Recording Secretary separately. I guess this is a valid point --> and a good way to encourage people to move to modern communications. I'll ping Rachael and Micah. > 3.2 Timing of Changes in Membership Status > Members may pay dues or postal fees for a given fiscal year at > any time. > (a) If dues or postal fees are paid prior to the beginning > of a fiscal year, all rights and privileges of membership > associated with those dues begin (or continue, for members who > are already active) at the start of the fiscal year. > (b) If dues or postal fees are paid after a fiscal year has > already begun, relevant rights of membership begin upon receipt > of payment by the LSMSAAA Treasurer; no privileges are > retroactive. > (c) Once a member of the LSMSAAA has paid lifetime dues > sufficient to cover 10 fiscal years, regardless of timing, that > person becomes a Lifetime Member. + "a fiscal year's dues" is defined as the dues in effect in the year in which the dues are paid *not* the year *for* which the dues are paid. i.e. dues paid in year X for year Y are billed at the rate of dues in effect for year X (assuming X No act of the Executive > Committee may revoke someone's Lifetime Membership. > > 3.3 Retroactive Rate Increases > Changes in the dues requirements (through Section 9, governing > constitutional amendments) may not be retroactive; anyone who has > paid dues for a given fiscal year before the new rate structure > takes effect will still qualify as having paid dues for that > year. No change in the dues requirements may revoke Lifetime > Membership once someone has qualified. maybe, this is trying to say the same thing as the point I was trying to make...but I can't quite tell. Andre' ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 12:26:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss Subject: VCC appears to be back Message from Virtual Constitutional Convention: I would like to apologize to members of the VCC for the recent communications difficulties. With the VCC down, Andre, Rachel and I have continued the conversation through direct email channels and tried to forward everything to you. But I know that this produced a series of confusing and sometimes repetetive email messages. The VCC seems back up, so if others would like to join the debate, they may do so again by sending email to constitution@lsmsaaa.org By the way, it's possible that the LSMSAAA may have to take whatever we draw up and run with it immediately, rather than wait on a vote from the association membership, since the association cannot even follow a legitimate amendment procedure with the broken constitution. So both the speed and the quality of our work has become more important. 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) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:37:32 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [voss1@fas.harvard.edu: please forward] - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 11:01:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss To: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: please forward In-Reply-To: <199709031957.MAA22492@growl.CS.Berkeley.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 3 Sep 1997, Andre' DeHon wrote: > 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. Andre's vision of a dynamic database sounds wonderful, if feasible. But as far as locality not mattering: I disagree. As we've seen with the alumni mailing lists, any technological "solution" is highly vulnerable to instability on the server end. Hell, our constitutional convention is partly paralyzed right now. And the LSMSA computers often go down. So either we would have to rely on LSMSA maintaining the server where all of this database activity was located, or we'd have to bounce the stuff around as alums were able to make computer resources available. Even having the LSMSAAA buy its own server isn't stable because we can't assume the Recording Secretary will always have adequate computer literacy. 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: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:40:08 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: please forward > > > 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. > > Andre's vision of a dynamic database sounds wonderful, if feasible. But > as far as locality not mattering: > > I disagree. As we've seen with the alumni mailing lists, any > technological "solution" is highly vulnerable to instability on the server > end. Hell, our constitutional convention is partly paralyzed right now. For the record -- we're having problems because we are operating with volunteers on zero budget. Computer access is borrowed based on the clout of individuals. This is not a fundamental problem, it is the problems of a bootleg operation. Andre' ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:45:20 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [voss1@fas.harvard.edu: Re: Sec. 3 -- Dues] - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 12:09:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss To: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Sec. 3 -- Dues In-Reply-To: <199709040601.XAA22623@growl.CS.Berkeley.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 3 Sep 1997, Andre' DeHon wrote: > > 3.1 Postal Fees > May an "inactive" member opt to only pay postal fees and only > receive communicatoins from the organization? > > Does this mean that an alum who doesn't really care about voting > can get away with just paying $2/year? > > I reccommend we change the wording to "Any Active member" > (or is the proper working "Any non-inactive member" (kinda like a > non-decreasing function, huh? :-) )) Yes, this is the appropriate interpretation of what I wrote. Your substitute would also, of course, be a valid constitutional policy. But my goal, both with dues and with voting membership, was to pull the two apart. You could subscribe to the mailing without being an active member, and be an active member without paying for a printed mailing. Indeed, I also intend to allow inactive members who can receive electronic communications to get LSMSAAA newsletters completely for free. So we are stacking up a couple of disagreements of real substance; once the server is stabilized and the VCC more conveniently "in session" maybe we can vote on some of this. Since currently everyone receives the Praecellemus, your proposal is a more radical departure than mine -- it requires people to pay full dues before they can receive communications. Frankly, such a restrictive proposal will lessen the LSMSAAA's potential influence, not increase it. The extra handful of memberships your punitive measures might induce would not compensate for the lessened circulation of any LSMSAAA communications. 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: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:46:05 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: [voss1@fas.harvard.edu: Re: Dues and membership] - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 12:16:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Dennis Voss To: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Dues and membership In-Reply-To: <199709040615.XAA22632@growl.CS.Berkeley.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 3 Sep 1997, Andre' DeHon wrote: > I partially suggest this in lieu of mailing newsletters to > everyone. Make the recent grads members by default, then send it only to > "Active" members. This gives the new people a couple of years (when they > are most poor) to see the organization before asking them to part with cash > to be members. Nothing in this Constitution prevents the LSMSAAA Executive Council from mailing communications to people who have not paid dues or postal fees. So the spirit of this suggestion could be followed without any changes. It does, currently, prevent these recent graduates from being "members" without paying dues -- so if you wanted to allow recent graduates to *vote* for free we need to change something. Note: The Constitution currently does not allow the LSMSAAA Executive Council to grant people active status arbitrarily (e.g., through their by-laws). I urge that we not remove this restriction, since voting rights accompany active status. 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: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:54:42 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andre' DeHon" Subject: Re: Sec. 3 -- Dues > Remember - the whole world isn't connected - yet. To paraphrase AT&T, "They will." Seriously, the growth in connectivity over the past couple of years has been phenomenal. It's quickly getting to the point where it is people's choice, not lack of opportunity, which is holding them back. ...and, as the momentum builds, more people will choose to participate. I will never advocate that we drop non-electronic communcation (and none of Steve's proposals do this), but the population who doesn't have access is shrinking rapidly. We would be short-sighted not to be taking that into account now. Andre' > > >> 3.1 Postal Fees > >> Any member of the LSMSAAA, regardless of status, may opt to receive > communications from the association through postal rather than electronic > media. Should a member of the LSMSAAA opt for postal communications, an > additional fee of $2 annually is required to defray costs. ? > > > I don't know how many people out of 2300 graduates are going to opt for > electronic communications. There are many of us who only have access to > the internet through our jobs or school. If I didn't have Netscape or > e-mail through work, I would have absolutely no access. Of those who have > access at work, how many would be allowed to, or feel comfortable getting > personal mail at work? I know several people who aren't allowed to use > their employers' systems for anything other than job-related messages. > Many places monitor employees e-mail and internet usage. While many of us > are connected, there is still a substantial portion of alumni who DO NOT > have access at all. When people have called to ask about reunions, or to > update their addresses, I always ask if they have e-mail, and you would be > surprised at the number who don't even know how to use e-mail. > > > Rachel > ------------------------------ End of LSMSAAA Constitution Digest V1 #9 ****************************************