ORIGINAL: Bob Mitchell
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
again
One or two guys that want to do the right thing will just get outvoted by the rest of the EC,
just like the couple EC votes AGAINST ppp
as an example of having a well meaning minority is a lot like not having them.
..... unless that minority has an iron fist "hard to work with" guy that forces the right things to be done with threats of exposure to the membership.... then a minority with Mr Unanimous Or Else can get stuff done.
WHAT is the reluctance to make any suggestions here for changes? You won't make any. Horrace just does his usual rant and won't make any. I don't think anyone else has either.
Why?
If it's wrong to talk about this with the current EC in place, then it's just as wrong (or just as much a waste of time) to talk about anything else the AMA leadership may be doing wrong......until the "new order" EC is in place.
I don't get it. What's wrong with talking about what you WOULD like to see? What's wrong with talking about what should be changed?
Is that why 90% of what is posted here is little more than P'ing & M'ing about how bad AMA leadership is, but without any suggestions of what to do to change that other than "throw the bums out"? If that's the case then why bother? Why even have an AMA forum?
Once we get one of your "has an iron fist "hard to work with" guy that forces the right things to be done with threats of exposure to the membership" fellows on the EC THEN can we talk about it? Or do we not talk about what we want until we get two of 'em? Three? Four? How many?
Do you come here just to complain?
Incumbant DVPs that are trying to get reelected can stay in the closed door nomination>ballot (who gets on ballot) while the other candidates for that seat have to step out. Home field advantage?
No one has to step out, KE. The only DVP candidate that could be there is the incumbant. If you're talking about a national office, I see nothing that says that the incumbant can stay but a non-incombant must leave.
Bob,
Whatcha think of that bit of election procedure?
What I think of THAT procedure is that it doesn't exist. What I think of the nomination and election procedures in general is well known to anyone who's been reading this thread. You know what I think. You know what I've suggested in it's place.
What we don't know is what anyone else suggests.
Is it just so much fun to complain about what is, that you don't have any energy left to suggest something different? Or do you just like to complain and don't really care about anything else?