RichMSN

I'm for the 2-term limit followed by 2 years off the TB, as I mentioned in the debate.

RichMSN

Is today the day you discovered the magic of cut-and-paste?

Mary2e

I support term limits and to add more angst to the list - not permitting moderators to be on TB. As much as Randy's tag line of "they are members first" gets bandied about, let's face it, they're not.

That's not a dig at the mods at all, some of them are my best friends I just want to see a true representation of pure members only on the TB.

itsaboutthejourney

+ 1 Well said Mary!

nsx

There may turn out to be 6 votes for this. koko's post 26 is pretty compelling.

tcook052

That whole discussion is IMHO better saved for a separate thread.

goalie

I completely agree with you on both points ^ and especially the latter (and I said just that while running for TalkBoard)

bhatnasx

FWIW, I'd rather see moderator term limits than TB term limits...the TB members are voted into place...the mods are not.

Spiff

Ah, but that is beyond TalkBoard's purview.

Cholula

I'm not into term limits on FT for either mods or TB members.

We have a very small number of active members on the website regardless of the number of registered members. And I'm happy that anyone chooses to serve in either capacity considering the payscale and the amount of work and potential abuse that comes with the positions.

Now if we want to discuss term limits for the folks who really affect our lives, the elected officials of the various countries throughout the world, I'll see you in OMNI/PR.

obscure2k

Well said. ^

Spiff

I quite agree. ^ (though mods are beyond our purview)

cblaisd

:like: ^

bhatnasx

There's always a commentary about the "payscale" of mods & TB members...From my 5 years as TB'er, the only "pay" we ever got was a 1 time small stipend towards covering travel expenses to a TB meeting. From what I understand, some mods recieve elite status in some programs....so may not have a physical salary, but don't let it be said that there are no benefits to being a mod.

That said, most do serve our community well - but there are some that should be forced a break to remember what it's like to be a member....

Yes, moderation is out of the purview of the TB and with no "ORP" style forum anymore, there's no public place to discuss it. I actually would love to see Moderation be within the purview of the TB - it'd give us more to do than create forums and bicker about post counts counting or putting restrictions on member access....which is basically what all of our motions seem to be about...

SkiAdcock

Back on-topic, which is term limits for TB members

I support term limits. I haven't decided yet if I'll run again next year, but if I do I would voluntarily term myself off after that if we don't put something in place to automatically term someone off after 2 terms.

To quote myself from earlier in the thread:

"I belong to some professional associations that have a term limit of X amount of terms followed by Y time off before being able to run again at Z time.

It's designed to have talented people who are familiar w/ the org serve & use their wisdom to better the organization, but not end up w/ 'career' board members or 'cartels' (cartel isn't the right word, but I think you know what I mean) & also provide a break to those who serve so that they don't burn out. And it's worked quite well."

And to quote myself again in response to someone else)

"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."

And to quote koko quoting BoardSource:

"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"

Cheers.