Siegfried would object if someone said it's nighttime. On Sunday, August 24, 2014 10:49 PM, Siegfried Jachmann <siegfried@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@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@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@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@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@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@wirelessbeehive.com
New address: paw@getbeehive.net
Clear skies,
Patrick Wiggins *************************
-- Siegfried
************************* My email address has changed.
Old address: paw@wirelessbeehive.com
New address: paw@getbeehive.net
Clear skies,
Patrick Wiggins *************************
-- Siegfried
Joe. That is uncalled for. It's in bad taste. I'm going to leave it there for now. On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 10:51 PM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> wrote:
Siegfried would object if someone said it's nighttime.
On Sunday, August 24, 2014 10:49 PM, Siegfried Jachmann < siegfried@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@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@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@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@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@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@wirelessbeehive.com
New address: paw@getbeehive.net
Clear skies,
Patrick Wiggins *************************
-- Siegfried
************************* My email address has changed.
Old address: paw@wirelessbeehive.com
New address: paw@getbeehive.net
Clear skies,
Patrick Wiggins *************************
-- Siegfried
-- Siegfried
On 24 Aug 2014, at 22:51, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> wrote:
Siegfried would object if someone said it's nighttime.
Ok, I'll admit that I laughed when I read that. Even added to myself "Party of "no". :) But in fairness, were it not for Siegfried and his legal knowledge and financial resources back in 1978/79 there might not even be a SLAS as we know it today. He's invested more time and effort in SLAS than almost all other members. So I respect what he's saying but I just think we need to change things to reflect reality. But, like he said, we can discuss this at the meeting. patrick
Oh I'm just teasing Sieg. Don't take it seriously. I like him a great deal. On Sunday, August 24, 2014 10:56 PM, Wiggins Patrick <paw@getbeehive.net> wrote: On 24 Aug 2014, at 22:51, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> wrote:
Siegfried would object if someone said it's nighttime.
Ok, I'll admit that I laughed when I read that. Even added to myself "Party of "no". :) But in fairness, were it not for Siegfried and his legal knowledge and financial resources back in 1978/79 there might not even be a SLAS as we know it today. He's invested more time and effort in SLAS than almost all other members. So I respect what he's saying but I just think we need to change things to reflect reality. But, like he said, we can discuss this at the meeting. patrick
Can someone please illuminate the actual proposed ammendment/procedure being discussed? I can't seem to find it in the entire thread history. Thanks!
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@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@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
I guess I'd need the backstory/reason/motivation for this, and why timing is seemingly so critical that it can't wait until January. I thought this was the kind of stuff the Board hashed-out at Denny's. Sorry, I've been out of the loop lately. On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Siegfried Jachmann <siegfried@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@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.
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@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@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@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@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".
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@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@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@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@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@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@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
I didn't know that Patrick even* had* an Elvis collection. On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Siegfried Jachmann <siegfried@jachmann.org> wrote:
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.
He's got all the records. ☺ On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote:
I didn't know that Patrick even* had* an Elvis collection.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Siegfried Jachmann < siegfried@jachmann.org> wrote:
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.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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
participants (5)
-
Brent Watson -
Chuck Hards -
Joe Bauman -
Siegfried Jachmann -
Wiggins Patrick