[H-GEN] agm agenda

[James Iseppi]

On Thu, August 31, 2006 11:17, Clinton Roy wrote:
> On 8/30/06, James Iseppi <lists at iseppi.org> wrote:
>
> Note that I'm suggesting the network shutdown and cleanup commence at
> ten thirty, the meeting would keep going until eleven. I certainly don't
> want to lose the relaxed, laid back nature of the meetings. Is there
> really something that you can do in five hours that you can't do in three?

Yes, I have to say there is. Often a meeting will consist of a number of
members either trying to achieve something for the night, or assisting
other members. How long some of these projects take is quite variable and
being forced to stop work at 10:30pm because the network is going down
would make it more difficult to finish such a project. Then it would be
necessary to organise time outside of HUMBUG meetings, or to wait a
fortnight. It would also make things more rushed, and really remove the
fun from helping other members.

> This is my main beef. It should not be a requirement to be a insomniac
> to be an exec member. Packing up the meetings should not be the main task
> that an exec agrees to, it should be a minor inconvenience, a side show.
> The fact that the current, highly competent, executive
> finds this task difficult to share around, means that the bar is set too
> high.

The issue here is that one of the main things HUMBUG does is run its
meetings. Reducing the length of these meetings almost turns them into a
sideshow of their own. What other things are the exec members expected to
do that are so onerous. I understand the President, Treasurer and
Secretary do have more responsibilities within the club, but this is
mainly in support of the meetings themselves and general administration of
the club.

> I think it would be a mistake to allow exec people to opt out of packing
> up.
> I am trying to lower the burdens placed on exec members such that more
> people can fulfil them.

Here I think lies the real issue. There are other things exec members can
do. They can setup meetings, this would allow them to help without being
insomniacs. They could also attend the meeting while other exec members
are wanting to go out for dinner, this would allow people like David to
actually get dinner rather than asking someone to pick something up for
them. As long as its made clear before being elected that they'd prefer
certain jobs, then I don't see an issue. Obviously we can't end up with an
exec of people who all don't want to do a certain job.

Thanks
James