- Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Re: [Utah-astronomy] SLAS Pres 2015
by Joe Bauman 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

Joan, I have just reread the constitution and I am baffled by your statement that it's a shame that one who wants to change it hasn't read it. Please explain what you mean by that aspersion because I am one who wants to change the constitution and I don't know what anyone on this side of the discussion said that is in conflict with it. I had read it before and, after your comment, read it again. You should clear this up because I for one do not like vague accusiations hanging over my head. Speaking of aspersions: Siegfried called me an extremist for supporting Charlie's proposed amendment. My response is that if somebody can't think of a sound argument in a discussion, he or she is apt to fall back on name-calling. I expected better from you, Siegfried. -- Joe ------------------------------ On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 11:46 AM MDT CenturyLink Customer wrote: > > >It's a shame one who wants to change the SLAS constitution isn't familiar with it. I haven't read the thing for well-more than a decade, maybe two, but the September meeting is a preliminary vote, only necessary if there are more than three running for a particular office and October is the only voting month . > > > >As for the current Presidential dilema. If Roger can't cajole someone into the office, I will rejoin the club and run as a write in - in October. > > > >As for the amendment. I am in full support of the term limitation. Perhaps someone should ask Roger if he would love to serve again or if he is grateful he doesn't have t o. The club needs new blood, always has and always will. It needs new ideas, fresh thoughts on old issues. It's aging and needs to focus on fixing that problem. That is its MAIN problem. SLAS has a fantastic facility at SPOC, but those who built it and care about it most are aging (sorry but its true). Who will take take of the facility in 20 years? 10 years? > > > >There are only t wo positions on the board that work and carry the brunt of SLAS for the year -. t he President and the Secretary/Treasurer. I would propose the Secretary/Treasurer be split into two offices, lessening the burden and a third board member at large be added to main tain an odd number on the board for tie votes. > > > >Finally, SLAS isn't a good ole boys club, it is a legal entity and the constitution provides sufficient (minimal, but sufficient) organization to give SLAS a 503(c) status. How might the propose d amendment affect that status? If someone can serve as Pres or whatever position for life, or until they get board (pun intended :)) it might jeopardize the irs status of the club. I re ally don't know, but it should certainly be a primary consideration before any amendment is even suggested. > > > >Me, myself and I, not a "CenturyLink Customer" - Wahoo!!!!! > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > >Send messages to the list to >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > >The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. > >To unsubscribe go to: >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".

7 7

test
by jcarman6＠q.com 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

This is just to see if I've eliminated the centurylink crap. Joan

3 3

Re: [Utah-astronomy] SLAS Pres 2015
by Bruce Hugo 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

Wow. 3 nominations, 3 declines. We've had the a similar problem in the Utah Orchid Society (UOS). Not many willing to take on the responsibilities of office. I'm the UOS president this year and I was the only one nominated who was willing to run. *sigh* Oh, on the SLAS Treasurer term debate: I'm not jumping into this heated debate, just offering an FYI - The Treasurer position in the UOS has no term limit. It does help keep the accounting stable/reliable as long as the member is willing to perform the duties and does them well (We have experienced Treasurer problems in the past). My only worry as President is if something were to happen to the Treasurer (car crash, health problems, etc.) you need to make sure there is a backup person who has all the accounting information and account data, just in case. I am actually presenting this at the next UOS board meeting. If not already done in the SLAS, it may be something to consider. Clear skies all and happy growing (Orchids)! Bruce Hugo

6 15

SLAS Pres 2015
by CenturyLink Customer 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

It's a shame one who wants to change the SLAS constitution isn't familiar with it. I haven't read the thing for well-more than a decade, maybe two, but the September meeting is a preliminary vote, only necessary if there are more than three running for a particular office and October is the only voting month . As for the current Presidential dilema. If Roger can't cajole someone into the office, I will rejoin the club and run as a write in - in October. As for the amendment. I am in full support of the term limitation. Perhaps someone should ask Roger if he would love to serve again or if he is grateful he doesn't have t o. The club needs new blood, always has and always will. It needs new ideas, fresh thoughts on old issues. It's aging and needs to focus on fixing that problem. That is its MAIN problem. SLAS has a fantastic facility at SPOC, but those who built it and care about it most are aging (sorry but its true). Who will take take of the facility in 20 years? 10 years? There are only t wo positions on the board that work and carry the brunt of SLAS for the year -. t he President and the Secretary/Treasurer. I would propose the Secretary/Treasurer be split into two offices, lessening the burden and a third board member at large be added to main tain an odd number on the board for tie votes. Finally, SLAS isn't a good ole boys club, it is a legal entity and the constitution provides sufficient (minimal, but sufficient) organization to give SLAS a 503(c) status. How might the propose d amendment affect that status? If someone can serve as Pres or whatever position for life, or until they get board (pun intended :)) it might jeopardize the irs status of the club. I re ally don't know, but it should certainly be a primary consideration before any amendment is even suggested. Me, myself and I, not a "CenturyLink Customer" - Wahoo!!!!!

3 3

ATM blast from the past
by Chuck Hards 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

I thought some of the ATMs on the list would get a kick out of my latest historical "find". http://www.cloudynights.com/topic/440921-classic-ashtrays/?p=6176776 It's at least 80 years old, with a direct connection to Russell W. Porter, and probably handled personally by his second-in-command at Stellafane at the time, John M. Pierce. It's a safe bet that had not Porter and his friends started the telescope-making movement in America back then, the face of amateur astronomy today would be very, very different.

5 7

retest
by Joan Carman 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] SLAS Pres 2015
by Bruce Hugo 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

I'm with Chuck! Thank you all past and present officers! Your hard work is much appreciated! Bruce Hugo Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 06:30:00 -0600 From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards(a)gmail.com> To: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman(a)yahoo.com>, Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] SLAS Pres 2015 Message-ID: <CAHmuOYrgb-9B93pW2ia-GdMhH_2VdF01Z11S=Cq+rVzagEsKAQ(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 If you all can hold out until I retire, I'll take a turn at running. Only 7 more years, LOL! In the meantime, all you get is my dues money and a heartfelt "Thank You" for your hard work on behalf of the club.

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] SLAS Pres 2015
by Joe Bauman 25 Aug '14

25 Aug '14

The problem, as shown by our latest set of nominations, is that secretary-treasurer is such a demanding chore that it's almost impossible to find someone other than Patrick who's competent and wants to do it. I know it because I did the treasurer's duties one year (note to Siegfried: Patrick did some of the secretary aspects of the job because he is the editor of Nova but I did club correspondence and all the treasurer's job). Knowing Patrick, I am certain he isn't trying to grab power, but wants to keep the club running smoothly. Finally, of course, this is a democratic club. We have secret ballots and can vote for someone else if we don't like the way an officer is carrying out the job. It is actually anti-democratic to tell us we can't vote for anyone we want. I can see the benefit of the one big term limit in our national Constitution, the restriction that the president can't serve more than two terms. But I don't think we're in danger of any of our officers launching a world war. We shouldn't take a simple proposal to make our club more democratic, to make it run more smoothly, and twist it into some plot to give power to Patrick in perpetuity. If Siegfried doesn't like it, he should run for secretary-treasurer. ------------------------------ On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 9:57 AM MDT Siegfried Jachmann wrote: >Charlie Green, Patrick and Joe Bauman want to do away with the clause that >limits a person to be an officer to two out of any three years. Basically, >eliminate term limits. > >The term limit clause was one of the main reasons for the "coup" in the >first place. It assures that there will never be a "Ryder" dynasty again. >This change, as I see it, is to accommodate Patrick so he can be perpetual >Secretary/Treasurer. He complained that although someone else may have had >the title, he was still doing the work. My answer to that is, let the other >person do the work and don't interfere. > >I am opposed to the change. While I think some structural changes could be >made similar to other organizations, eliminating the term limitations is >the wrong thing to do. > >Siegfried > > >On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Brent Watson via Utah-Astronomy < >utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> wrote: > >> For those of us who are less informed, what is the nature of the proposed >> amendment? I realize this is not an official club forum, but it would be >> interesting to see the amendment published here. >> >> >> On Monday, August 25, 2014 8:51 AM, Siegfried Jachmann < >> siegfried(a)jachmann.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> Here it is again. >> >> btw., are you able to run for SLAS office? >> >> *Article VIII Constitutional Amendments and Bylaws* >> >> *A. Any member may propose amendment(s) and/or bylaws.* >> >> *B. The amendment and adoption process shall be:* >> >> *1. The proposed amendment(s) and/or bylaw(s), hereinafter called >> "amendment", shall be* >> >> *published in the journal along with notice that the proposed amendment >> will be discussed at* >> >> *the next general meeting.* >> >> *2. The proposed amendment shall be discussed at the next general meeting.* >> >> *3. The following journal will include:* >> >> *a. The pros and cons concerning the proposed amendment written by >> advocates on each* >> >> *side.* >> >> *b. Notification that a vote on the proposed amendment will take place at >> the next* >> >> *general meeting.* >> >> *c. Absentee ballots for the amendment.* >> >> *4. The proposed amendment will be voted on during the next general meeting >> by the* >> >> *memberships present and absentee ballots.* >> >> >> >> *5. The proposed amendment will be adopted if 2/3 of the votes cast favor >> adoption.* >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Can someone please illuminate the actual proposed ammendment/procedure >> > being discussed? I can't seem to find it in the entire thread history. >> > >> > Thanks! >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Utah-Astronomy mailing list >> > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >> > >> > Send messages to the list to >> > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com >> > >> > The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy >> club. >> > >> > To unsubscribe go to: >> > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >> > Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on >> > "Unsubscribe or edit options". >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Siegfried >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Utah-Astronomy mailing list >> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >> >> Send messages to the list to >> Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com >> >> The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. >> >> To unsubscribe go to: >> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >> Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on >> "Unsubscribe or edit options". >> _______________________________________________ >> Utah-Astronomy mailing list >> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >> >> Send messages to the list to >> Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com >> >> The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. >> >> To unsubscribe go to: >> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >> Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on >> "Unsubscribe or edit options". >> > > > >-- >Siegfried >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > >Send messages to the list to >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > >The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. > >To unsubscribe go to: >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".

4 5

SLAS Pres 2015
by CenturyLink Customer 25 Aug '14

25 Aug '14

Joe would be wiser to propose an admendment that requires a bus be provided for all SLAS events <grins>

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] SLAS Pres 2015
by Joe Bauman 25 Aug '14

25 Aug '14

Siegfried would object if someone said it's nighttime. On Sunday, August 24, 2014 10:49 PM, Siegfried Jachmann <siegfried(a)jachmann.org> wrote: I think that is wrong. I think the names are to be included. That is something that can be brought up at the next Board meeting. On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Wiggins Patrick <paw(a)getbeehive.net> wrote: Hi Sieg, > >Apologies. I did not word that correctly. > >I just listed those who came quickly to mind. I don't think any names are to be attached to the pro and con statements. > >Just one statement listing the pros and another listing the cons. > >??? > >patrick > > > >On 24 Aug 2014, at 22:39, Siegfried Jachmann <siegfried(a)jachmann.org> wrote: > >> In order to be fair, as is expected by the Constitution, if there are 3 people writing "pros" then there will be additional opposition write-ups. It is not just me that stands in opposition to this amendment. In any case, there should be an equal number of pros and cons. >> >> >> Siegfried >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Wiggins Patrick <paw(a)getbeehive.net> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Yep, Charlie's proposed amendment will be in the Nova that comes out later this week. >> >> Then we talk about it at the meeting on 17 September. >> >> Charlie's, Joe's and my pros and Sieg's cons go in the issue of Nova that comes out the end of October and the vote is at the meeting on 19 November. >> >> Sound right to everyone? >> >> patrick >> >> On 24 Aug 2014, at 20:05, Rodger C. Fry <rcfry(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >> > Patrick, >> > >> > We haven’t been following the constitution in amending it. We must first post the proposed amendment in the NOVA, then have a discussion of pros & cons at a general meeting which is then followed by a vote. Please read below and this we must follow. >> > >> > Thanks >> > Rodger C. Fry >> > >> > From: Siegfried Jachmann [mailto:siegfried@jachmann.org] >> > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:12 AM >> > To: Rodger C. Fry; astro(a)ryansimpkins.com >> > Subject: Re: SLAS Pres 2015 >> > >> > Thank you for your inputs and thoughts regarding the proposed Constitutional amendment. Upon review of the Constitution I believe Patrick was rushing the process by calling for the pros and cons for the proposed amendment to published in the upcoming NOVA. The current Constitution is very specific in the process required to amend the Constitution. This is the text of the Constitution. >> > >> > >> > >> > Article VIII Constitutional Amendments and Bylaws >> > A. Any member may propose amendment(s) and/or bylaws. >> > B. The amendment and adoption process shall be: >> > 1. The proposed amendment(s) and/or bylaw(s), hereinafter called "amendment", shall be >> > published in the journal along with notice that the proposed amendment will be discussed at >> > the next general meeting. >> > 2. The proposed amendment shall be discussed at the next general meeting. >> > 3. The following journal will include: >> > a. The pros and cons concerning the proposed amendment written by advocates on each >> > side. >> > b. Notification that a vote on the proposed amendment will take place at the next >> > general meeting. >> > c. Absentee ballots for the amendment. >> > 4. The proposed amendment will be voted on during the next general meeting by the >> > memberships present and absentee ballots. >> > 5. The proposed amendment will be adopted if 2/3 of the votes cast favor adoption. >> > >> > >> > >> > A proposed amendment must first be published in the NOVA. It is Charley and Patrick's responsibility to write the amendment for the NOVA. If is it published in the next NOVA it is then to be discussed in the next general meeting, which in this case would be the September meeting. It also means there cannot be a vote on the proposed amendment at the September meeting except perhaps a vote to gauge the sentiment. Nothing binding. >> > >> > The next NOVA (2nd NOVA since the proposed amendment must be published first) will contain the pros and cons. Since the NOVA is a semi-monthly publication it will be the November-December issue that will carry the pro and con texts. >> > >> > Since there is no December general meeting the vote on the issue may take it into January, although, if Patrick rushes the NOVA, it could be November. >> > >> > I apologize for not remembering the process. I accepted Patrick's request for the pros and cons to be in the upcoming NOVA when in fact, it is first required that the proposed amendment is published without the pros and cons. When it is discussed in the next meeting a straw vote can be taken to see it the amendment has support. If it doesn't there is the chance Charlie may withdraw it. >> > >> > In any case we need to follow the provisions of the Constitution. >> > >> > Siegfried >> > >> >> ************************* >> My email address is changing. >> >> Old address: >> paw(a)wirelessbeehive.com >> >> New address: >> paw(a)getbeehive.net >> >> Clear skies, >> >> Patrick Wiggins >> ************************* >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Siegfried > >************************* >My email address has changed. > > >Old address: >paw(a)wirelessbeehive.com > >New address: >paw(a)getbeehive.net > >Clear skies, > >Patrick Wiggins >************************* > > -- Siegfried

5 10