SkiAdcock

Nope. Just thought of it - clique, inner closed circle, etc. Not cartel or cabal.

I probably wouldn't support retroactive, although I would most likely support a break between serving as is done w/ some professional organizations to which I belong (and have served on their boards).

Agree w/ B747-437B.

Cheers.

bhatnasx

Agreed as well!

This is how I sort of look at it...I'm here because I care about the community & I enjoy this community.

Pretend that IB is the government. Pretend that you live in a particular neighborhood. People participate in Neighborhood Watch programs or Community Cleanup days...why to give back to the community & make it a better place.

I don't see me as feeding the IB coffers - they're not charging me for this service & I'm not charging them for mine. Are they making money? Maybe - but as long as they're interested in member input, I'm happy to provide as this is a community that has benefited me & I've made some amazing friends & met some wonderful people through this community...

Now, as for term limits - I'm with the folks that think the market should decide - I'm happy to volunteer my service & view myself as an engaged member. Out of the 4 people that were voted into office, this past election, I was in "4th place" - had I not been voted in, I would have been happy as the community selected the people they want to represent them.

SkiAdcock

And presumably if the community decides that they prefer term limits you (and presumably ofther TB members) will be ok w/ that, given we represent the community. I realize you can't speak for other TB members, but I know I would.

I also know that I think it should be offered up to the FT community for discussion when the time is right, as well as the TB, and I will promote that.

For what it's worth & it sounds weird given I'm now a TB member, but for the most part I don't have a dog in this hunt. I'm fine either way.

I've served on professional associations' boards that did have a xx year on, yy year off before running for zz time again. And it worked for those groups - and believe me, they had a lot more at stake than this BB does. We do have to put some things into perspective.

Cheers. Sharon

essxjay

Weak analogy. We're not a company and our volunteer advisory panel doesn't spend upwards of 60 hours a week in joint sessions.

Hear hear!

Dunno if I tally as a regular FTer in your book but I'm of the same mind as Cholula -- don't arbitrarily limit voters' choices.

ScottC

Agree 100% on term limits. Votes are not given to those most suitable, they are given to those most popular. Those that post the most, post to a blog or moderate are obviously the most active on the board, and those names are the ones that get the attention.

Limit to two terms, and even consider limiting the number of "positions" a member can hold on Flyertalk.

jackal

Agree 100%.

Really? I can't speak for others, but I was named the runner-up well before I was even approached about being a moderator, I post to no [currently active, worth-reading] blog, and I'm not an FT Evangelist. And I can guarantee you that at the time I ran for TalkBoard, virtually no one in the top, say, 5 forums on FlyerTalk had ever heard of me.

All that said, I'm not necessarily opposed to term limits.

kokonutz

I cannot compare you to Ron Paul on the issue of term limits. Because you are nothing like him.

Ron Paul supports term limits. You oppose them.

gdeluca

The problem with this IMHO is that voters see name recognition with the same people running and serving year after year. If FT members are not aware of some candidates, it may be easier to vote for who they recognize. There may be a lot of talented FT members who would like to run for TB but hesitate to do so because they may feel there is no chance they will win against established TBers.

In all the non-profits I have worked for there were term limits with 4 years maximum and then a break for Board members. It allowed other members of to serve and contribute to the leadership of their organization.

While there has been discussion on the relevance of the TB , it would be nice to see other FT members serve.

Fresh perspectives after all.

Cholula

I don't disagree with you but how does this differ from, say, a national political election?

There were undoubtedly tens of thousands of Americans better qualified to be President than the several candidates who ran in the last election. But they didn't run and weren't elected because people didn't know who they were.

Folks vote for who they know and who they trust. It's been that way since the beginning of time and erecting term limit barriers is not going to correct this. Folks are still going to vote for who they know and trust.

And just "being known" is no certain pass to getting on TB. I knew a lot of folks in the last election and some of them did not get my vote nor the vote of very many others.

gdeluca

I don't disagree to your point here. However, if there were term limits it would give others a chance to serve. I feel the TB over the years has done a tremendous job, and sometimes thanklessly so.

Nonetheless, if others are allowed to serve then that expands the TB perspective and gives less well-known FTers a chance to give back to their much beloved community. It is possible to elect less well-known members who will then prove themselves to be capable and trusted.

kokonutz

I think the more apt comparison is to professional associations than national elections. And most of those have term limited board positions in order to maximize participation and new ideas.

Governance literature tends to reinforce the idea of fixed terms as a “best practice” for not-for-profit boards after doing a pro-con analysis.

Here's a pretty good example of a pros and cons list that steers most folks to support term limits on boards:

By: BoardSource
Many boards find that setting term limits can be beneficial. The following are some advantages of a term limit policy:

•The board has the possibility of working with active community members who can devote only a few years to board service.
•Bringing diversity onto the board is easier.
•The board has a built-in balance of continuity and turnover.
•Passive, ineffective, or troublesome board members can be more easily rotated off.
•Board members experience a better rotation of committee assignments.
•A regular infusion of fresh ideas and new perspectives is brought onto the board.
•The board gains a regular awareness and pays attention to the changing group dynamics.
•Limits present an opportunity for the board and the retiring board member to reassess a mutual willingness to continue working together with the possibility of enlarging the circle of committed supporters by keeping retired board members involved.

Disadvantages of term limits
The downside to having terms limits can mean:
•the loss of expertise and organizational memory;
•the board spends more time dedicated to recruitment and orientation; and
•additional efforts are needed to keep the group cohesive.

Disadvantages of not having term limits
Boards without a term limit policy can experience:
•stagnation if no change occurs among the board members;
•perpetual concentration of power within a small group;
•intimidation of the occasional new member;
•tiredness, boredom, and loss of commitment by the board; and
•loss of connection to the constituency due to a change in demographics or environmental factors

Cholula

Thanks.

That's a thought-provoking list.

gleff

So did Strom Thurmond. One of the funniest political memories I have was watching a Strom Thurmond stump speech in 1996.

Now, mind you that at the time the man had served over 40 years in the Senate already.

He said, "I believe in smaller government... and term limits."

And as if that weren't enough, without a touch of irony he continued, "And you're gonna vote for me, because I can bring more money to South Carolina in the next six years.. than my opponent could in 60!"

I pledge that I have very little in common with Strom Thurmond. I suspect we all support term limits at some outer bounds, adn the only question is of degree or length.

See, Strom Thurmond really shouldn't have served through January 2003...

tom911

Can we expect this topic to come up for a vote with the new Talk Board?

kokonutz

Elections have consequences! ^