Letters on the Butt.

[Senusret I]

Mark,

What you think you are doing, what you are actually doing, and how it makes Brothers react are probably three different things.

I ask that you take a hard look on your approach and determine whether it is what's best for the brotherhood, or if what you intend can be proactively teachable through alternative methods such as conferences, conventions, communication through section chairs, etc.

The brothers who are posting these ideas for bylaws concerns on facebook sometimes are brothers initiated within the last two years or alumni who have no other outlet to discuss.

Again, the approach is what troubles me, not the intent. It makes me not want to openly discuss bylaws proposals.

[mastratton]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

Mark,

What you think you are doing, what you are actually doing, and how it makes Brothers react are probably three different things.

I ask that you take a hard look on your approach and determine whether it is what's best for the brotherhood, or if what you intend can be proactively teachable through alternative methods such as conferences, conventions, communication through section chairs, etc.

The brothers who are posting these ideas for bylaws concerns on facebook sometimes are brothers initiated within the last two years or alumni who have no other outlet to discuss.

Again, the approach is what troubles me, not the intent. It makes me not want to openly discuss bylaws proposals.

See, I knew you were talking about me. :-)

But it's a fair point, and I'll try to post something on the other group later to try to provide an explanation on the difference betweeen bylaws and resolutions/policies.

But I absolutely am not trying to stop people from discussing these things, but I do try to get them to think things like, "is this necessary?" or "is this the best way to accomplish this?" That's really what I'm trying to get to.

I'll try to put up something that's more educational/instructive.

But the ability of persons to propose these ideas, and to have people discuss them, improve them, find the best way to make the best things happen - that's the important thing.

Let me give you an example. A few years back, someone wanted to propose making the liaison from the BSA (who sits on our Board) a voting member of the Board. That person is already a voting member. If no one had said anything, that would have been a bylaw proposal that would have gone to a reference committee, that would have been required to be reviewed by that committee, receiving testimony, etc. only to find out that the whole thing was unnecessary. That would have meant that committee would have spent all that time - for nothing. That's not even a teachable moment for the committee, but it IS A teachable moment for the Brother who proposed it, and for the Brother(s) who gave him the wrong information. People have to be able to weigh in on those things. Maybe what you're saying is that *I* shouldn't be the one to weigh in (but I do so based on my experiences and knowledge in this area.)

It's much like the discussion about resolutions. The myth in APO is that resolutions aren't enforceable, and just isn't true. We have to dispel that myth.

Thanks for the note - I appreciate it.

Mark

[emb021]

Originally Posted by mastratton

But it's a fair point, and I'll try to post something on the other group later to try to provide an explanation on the difference betweeen bylaws and resolutions/policies.

Uh, as someone who setup the legislative FB group, I don't see Mark's comments as being an issue.

What I do see as an issue, based on some comments on this thread, is the attitude that only things in the bylaws are enforcable or the like.

Sorry, just not so.

People need to understand that Bylaws are but ONE of SEVERAL documents that guide organizations.

You have:

* National/state laws
* Articles of Associations/Articles of Incorporation
* Bylaws
* Special Rules of Order
* Standing Rules (which includes any policies/procedures)
* Parliamentary Authority

For APO as a National Organization, we have several standing rules:

* Convention Standing Rules (adopted at the begining of the convention. They seldom change much from year to year).
* Risk Management Policy
* Membership Policy
* National Pledging Standards

These are all adopted by the legislation at Convention, and changed by them.


Mark's point, and I think its a good one, is to get people to think about their proposals BEFORE they propose it. Do we really need it? Could it be handled other then by changing the bylaws (say thru a resolution or the like)?

This is part of the reason why some of us created the old Yahoo Groups for legislation (and why I created the FB group). It gives people a forum for discussion their ideas before proposing it. Maybe some won't be proposed. Maybe some will become a better proposal. Maybe some good proposals will get some additional people to support it. You could almost call it a sort of "pre-reference committee" in a sense.