Originally Posted by
Jenbel
[snip]
The status quo is not an acceptable outcome for me. It doesn’t work. It has failed repeatedly. It’s failing now. No TB member has ever been removed for failing to live upto their responsibilities, despite some truly shameful episodes – thus, TB members can do anything they want, neglect their responsibilities, the members lose out, and TB members are not held accountable.
That to me is simply not acceptable. Part of this job is the acceptance of the responsibility of being a TB member and what that entails – that we are the elected representatives of the members and we should represent them. If TB members are not willing to live up to their responsibilities, then they should be removed. Simple as that. But unfortunately, that has not happened, will not happen and is likely never to happen under the current system. Of course, those members that consider rules and regs not that important are quite happy with that. Unfortunately, I’m not one of them, and I’m not willing to condone a system which I know has failed, is failing and will fail. It’s never worked. Why should we be satisfied with something which is so clearly bad?
[snip]
[fwiw, this is a slightly edited repost of my own words from the private TB forum, posted yesterday]
My personal feeling is that you are presenting a false choice. You seem to me to be saying that either we vote to remove someone who by your standards deserves to be removed OR we have to make such removals automatic.
Well I'm sorry, but my standards are different from your standards and I don't appreciate your attempting to force your standards on me and the rest of the TB and all of FT. And that's why I support
allowing each TB member to decide for him or herself when another TB member has gone so far as to not belong here. And requiring that 2/3 feel the same way before action is taken.
You and others have argued that this system results (or at least has resulted) in inaction against TB members who clearly, in your opinion, deserved to be removed. But enough of your colleagues clearly disagreed with that notion that no motion to remove a TB member has passed. You call that cronyism. I for one don't appreciate having my motives called into question on the matter, especially when I have gone to great lengths to explain my logic and reasoning on the matter.
But having lost that fight in the past you now want to change the rules so you will never lose it again.
You keep saying the current system is broken because you have not gotten the result you wanted regarding removing TB members who dont live up to
your standards. That's like me complaining about the system because there is no Mens Travel Forum. In both of these cases the problem is not the system, the problem is that not enough TB members are convinced about the relative merits the motion for it to carry.
If you want a motion to kick off a member of the TB to pass, make the case for it just like you'd make the case for any other TB motion to pass. If it carries, it carries. But if it fails, it fails. But either way it is and will be no cause in and of itself to change the rules, any more than my inability to get a Mens Travel Forum approved is a reason to change the rules regarding the establishment of a forum.
In any case, the status quo is what it is. I am happy to live with it if need be. I'd PREFER written guidelines that clarify and codify the status quo and that's why I took on this project back before PHX. But if no written guidelines pass then we will be where we were and are. Status quo prevails.
And to me, that's better than formally abdicating my own best judgement (which I was elected to follow) to automatic provisions based on judgement calls by non-elected volunteers.
In the meantime, if at least six current TB members are willing to at least be open to it, I have offered to work up a draft that does not include the two controversial changes to the status quo.
I personally dont see why codifying the way things CURRENTLY OPERATE should be something to oppose. After all, once codified it makes it that much easier to try to change in the future. But if my offer gets traction, it gets traction. If it does not, it does not.
After all...there is always the next TB! (with apolgies to Scarlett O'Hara)