Re: AGM/Executive places

Christopher Fraser (chrisf@nospam.sour.sw.oz.au)
Thu, 9 Mar 1995 18:22:38 +1100 (EST)

But I thought Peter Lees said:
>
>
> piers wrote:
>
> > I don't think people should promote themselves for positions.
> [...]
> > As the vote is open to all paid-up members, it will be the members' own
> > ideas of who is suitable for office that will decide who actually is
> > elected.
>
> unfortunately 90% (or possibly more) of the members don't have
> a clue what the other people *look* like, let alone what their
> personalities and/or skills may be. this makes it hard to make any
> judgement, accurate or otherwise.
>
> another problem (which occurs in *all* clubs & societies) is that about
> 10% of the members do 95% (or more) of the work. these are also the
> people who know what each other look like, and are also able to make
> accurate (and even concerted) judgements of who to vote for. this can
> be a good thing, since it leads to some stability and allows the society
> to get on with *doing* things rather than stuffing about arguing over
> elections. however, an unfortunate side-effect of this, umm, "elite"
> (best word i could think of) group is that the group tends to graduate
> (ie leave) at the same or similar time, thus destroying the stable helm
> and leaving the society flapping about loosely for a couple of years
> before another stable group takes control.

Yup, this a problem, and was basicly what happened in, humm, was
it 1990 or 1991? Although, I should hasten to add people shouldn't
be concerned about needing to be a long-term ProgSoc member or
"experienced" before becoming involved. There are plenty of people
willing to offer help and support, but who don't have time to the
job themselves. (As an aside, I won't be running for any executive
positions this year -- too many commitments to a timely job etc.
I am, however, happy to be "around" and help where I can).

> what has this got to do with anything?
>
> well, there are two points really:
>
> 1 - it would be good to know who the likely candidates are
> ie: who's interested in what positions, what they do now,
> what they want to do, stuff like that
>
> 2 - there may be some merit in creating a 7th executive postion:
> "First Year Representative". in my experience, this is a
> good way of getting a stable management some "new blood" ,
> who can then learn what's going on and why, so some kind of
> continuity can be maintained.
>
> i won't pretend i know the intricacies of numbers required on committees,
> etc, but would like to know if anyone else thinks this is a good idea.

I think having a first year representative is a excellent idea (or perhaps
less formally, we should make sure the executive isn't just old timers).

> (come on, you lurkers! i know you're out there!)
>
>
> cheers
>
> peter
> (professional ranter)

Christopher.