[HamWAN PSDR] director responsibilities

Tue Feb 18 10:22:22 PST 2014

Rob,

I agree that the directors need to play a more active role in the
administration of the network. Particularly around voting. However, I have
to disagree with some of the implications you've made.

Organizations, businesses, and governments are built on trust. They simply
cannot survive without them. At the end of the day you MUST trust somebody.
To use your example "the potential for one person to drain the bank account
or other (insert your favorite foolhardy) act." How is this any different
from any business? You have an accountant or controller with the keys to
the kingdom, being the bank account, and you trust them to do their job
responsibly. You may trust them because you believe they won't violate it
because they want to get paid or for fear of repercussions, but it is trust
the same.

Having a checks and balances situation here only gives you the opportunity
to say "Hey, we didn't authorize that!", and doesn't actually protect you
from them draining the bank account in the first place (from the
aforementioned example). And while I agree that even what checks/balances
gives us (deniability) is a good thing, requiring extraordinary measures
(like requiring ALL directors to vote) will easily become a hindrance to
the project, and buy us very very little in my opinion.

Perhaps, at some point in the future, I would amenable to implementing
something that I think is perhaps a bit more reasonable, say a majority of
directors vote YAY. However, based on where we are now, considering the few
people that (given the current constitution) are eligible to be directors,
let alone are willing to serve in that capacity, I believe we stand where
we've stood before, in that we have to trust the people we elect to be
directors to make decisions for the good of the project and in a
responsible manner, as well as expect them to be active in their elected
roles.

Lastly, this is certainly a personal opinion, and I cannot speak for
others, but we are in amateur radio as a hobby. We do it because it is
enjoyable. It is not a job, and while we strive hard to provide the best
service possible, it's too easily forgotten that we are ALL volunteers. Our
time, our money, our expertise is freely given to the project because we
enjoy doing so. Let's continue to do that, and not make it another job that
we will never get paid for.

Thanks,
Nigel

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Rob Salsgiver <rob at quailsoftltd.net> wrote:

> Having a more "relaxed" set of rules has its place - up to a point.  As I
> said earlier, HamWAN would not be where it is today without them.  That
> said, there is a reason why governance standards have evolved.  A quorum
> requirement ensures that a single individual cannot essentially "bring
> down" an organization - whether that be intentional or accidental.
>
>
>
> It is hard to make a pitch to government or other EMCOMM entities to sign
> them up and/or pay taxpayer (or other) funds toward HamWAN when it doesn't
> even have basic checks and balances in place - i.e. - the potential for one
> person to drain the bank account or other (insert your favorite foolhardy)
> act.  If I'm a director and I decide I want a fractal flux capacitor for my
> lab for testing and I'm the only one that votes because everyone else is
> asleep or out of town,  this is a senseless risk that is easily avoided by
> REQUIRING a YAY or NAY from all directors - we're not talking rocket or
> microwave science here, it's pretty basic.
>
>
>
> It ends up being a question of what arena you want to play in.  If you
> want to operate a hobby network that has an EMCOMM element and (HamWAN)
> funds and supplies the equipment to the EMCOMM agencies, you can probably
> make it work as-is.  If you are representing yourselves as a reliable
> EMCOMM solution and asking for entities to buy their own equipment and
> donate to support the network, you have to also pass muster on the
> organizational front.  This includes marketing, support, and finance.
>
>
>
> I believe we can get a LOT of EMCOMM interest and support (read FUNDS) for
> HamWAN if done the right way.   We are missing a couple elements before we
> can say that we're doing it the "right way".
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* PSDR [mailto:psdr-bounces at hamwan.org] *On Behalf Of *Bart Kus
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 15, 2014 9:39 AM
> *To:* Puget Sound Data Ring
> *Subject:* Re: [HamWAN PSDR] director responsibilities
>
>
>
> I designed the director role into the constitution in such a way to remove
> as many obstacles as reasonable in allowing an active supporting member to
> accomplish the most that they can for HamWAN.  Fast voting periods, no need
> for quorum, discretionary spending without approval required up to a
> certain limit.  While not expressly written down, it's my hope that anyone
> holding such a position will take advantage of these provisions to move the
> project forward as quickly as they can.
>
> --Bart
>
>
> On 2/14/2014 10:46 PM, Tom Hayward wrote:
>
> For those who haven't looked it up, here's the section on director duties
> from the constitution:
>
> *Article IV - Decisions*
>
> Director decisions or actions which:
> - impact HamWAN finances in excess of $100 USD
> - or contractually obligate HamWAN in any way
> - or are reasonably judged as significant
> shall be announced to all public HamWAN mailing lists. Voting will be
> considered complete 24 hours after the mailing list announcement of the
> issue at hand. Decisions shall be rendered approved by a majority vote of
> the Directors who voted. Directors unfamiliar with the issue at hand are
> encouraged to abstain from voting. Non-Directors cannot cast votes,
> although they can communicate with Directors to influence their votes on
> issues.
>
> Over the past year, I saw only a handful of votes cast by directors. Many
> spending proposals were made and voted on by only Bart. I'd like to see the
> next batch of directors take a more active role. Moreover, I hope that they
> generally have a strong understanding of what they are voting on and can
> justify their votes to the membership.
>
> Tom KD7LXL
>
> On Feb 14, 2014 8:03 PM, "Rob Salsgiver" <rob at nr3o.com> wrote:
>
> I was going to ask if there were any specific duties, responsibilities,
> and/or expectations for directors - then I went online and looked it up.
>
>
>
> In the context of the current vote, is there any value in having a
> discussion on what expectations there should be of prospective directors?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PSDR mailing list
> PSDR at hamwan.org
> http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> PSDR mailing list
>
> PSDR at hamwan.org
>
> http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PSDR mailing list
> PSDR at hamwan.org
> http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
>
>

-- 
Nigel Vander Houwen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20140218/52373832/attachment.html>