Thanks Thanks:  0
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 41

Thread: What's happening with GAGB

  1. #1
    Lassitude Guest

    Default

    I know GAGB has not been recieved with the complete approval of all Geocachers but can some of you GAGB officionados tell me what is happening to it at present as I have been avoiding the forums recently and I am a little out of touch?

    Kind Regards

    Chris (Lassitude) :unsure:

  2. #2
    MCL Guest

    Default

    Not a great amount. We are still in the process of electing a committee, so that probably for the best untill that is up and running.

  3. #3
    paul.blitz Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Lassitude@Oct 26 2003, 09:29 PM
    .... but can some of you GAGB officionados tell me what is happening to it at present as I have been avoiding the forums recently and I am a little out of touch?
    As MCL observed, we ARE still awaiting the election of our final committee member.

    After that, I'm kinda hoping that we will all have a "virtual get-together" online, to see what needs to be done, and who is gonna do it. I'm sure we'll be looking out towards the membership to help us!

    One of the first things we will need to address is the issue of chairman. There are obviously various opions open, but I think its unfair to start ANY discussion on that issue until we have finished electing the committee... and that will be next week.

    paul

  4. #4
    TheCat Guest

    Default

    Tell me to shut up if you wish but will that mean that there will only be five committee members? I thought the plan was for 6.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    134

    Default

    IMHO the chairman should be elected from the 5 memebers.. by the 5 members then a poll to fill the gap. The candidates from the poll being those already proposed for the original comittee
    Moss The Boss... Sorta

  6. #6
    Paul G0TLG Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Moss Trooper@Oct 28 2003, 07:59 PM
    IMHO the chairman should be elected from the 5 members
    I agree with Moss the Boss...our incoming committee has a fair list of jobs that need doing, and have quite rightly held off on proceeding very far with them until the whole committee was in place. Now I think they should appoint their chairman from within their number by the quickest possible method, and crack on with the "to-do" list.

    Things like the exact number of committee members, methods for replacing committee members in the event of resignation etc, are "fine tuning" which can be sorted once we are up and running and underway (but no implied criticism of TheCat for raising the point&#33

    Paul
    Opinions are those of the author alone, who is labouring under a crashing hangover anyway...

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    209

    Default

    Originally posted by TheCat@Oct 28 2003, 07:36 PM
    Tell me to shut up if you wish but will that mean that there will only be five committee members? I thought the plan was for 6.
    Nah !

    In a poll here it was voted by the members to have a committee structure of "one nominated position, that of "Chair" and five others"

    Since we resigned as chair, it has been mentioned that the position needs to be filled. The current members of the committe have not yet said how that is to be done, perhaps they are waiting for the 5th member to be elected before they make a decision/announcement.

    There are numerous methods of replacing the chair, and because I have faith in them (shouldn't we all ?), I for one am happy to accept whichever they choose.
    <span style=\'font-size:10pt;line-height:100%\'><span style=\'color:green\'><span style=\'font-family:Arial\'>totally brassed off </span></span></span>

  8. #8
    MCL Guest

    Default

    Well in my book, "one nominated position and five others" means six committee positions, one of which happens to be chair.

    This was, as Tim and June have pointed out, a decision reached after a vote by the members. Therefore I believe there is a clear mandate from the members to have a committee of six.

    Therefore we must elect a committee of six, as would have been the case had T&J not resigned (ie we elected them, and were then to elect 5 others...thats six elections filling six places.)

    The only difference now being that the members are not likely to actually choose the new chair, but in all cases they were going to elect the six original committee members, and so they must still do so. To do otherwise would be to go against the voted wishes of the members.

    Or am I talking garbage here? It makes perfect sense to me, but I&#39;m willing to stand corrected. B)

  9. #9
    Paul G0TLG Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by MCL@Oct 30 2003, 01:16 AM
    Or am I talking garbage here? It makes perfect sense to me, but I&#39;m willing to stand corrected. B)
    I don&#39;t think you&#39;re talking garbage, MCL (or may I call you M? B) ), I just think that of all the things the GAGB needs to get done, getting exactly the right number of people on the committee is a fairly low priority.

    Having said that, we&#39;ve spent this long getting it right (no criticism) that the fortnight for one more vote is probably worth it to save a load of wrangling.

    Of course, given the current state of vote number 4, it might end up in a tie and that would give us our comittee of six anyway&#33;

    Cache on...

    Paul

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Lets get things squared away.. The voters are voting for 6 members. The fact that T & J resigned makes little difference to the vote.

    The members have/are voting on the sixth member for comittee, anothe poll would take that up to 7 effectivley&#33;

    In my view as I have said previously the comittee should pick one member to become chair and then all 5 members vote one of those from original nominees onto comittee as 6th member.

    In the event of a tie in this last poll then you have your 6 members anyway and they can vote for chair between themselves.

    Remember that we are putting GAGB into the hands of the comittee and trust them to do the job to best of their ability, including voting members onto comittee.

    If we go for another poll things will drag on and on.. On first poll there were 794 views. on second 689 and on this poll 364. Should we be taking note of this trend&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;
    Moss The Boss... Sorta

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Originally posted by Paul G0TLG@Oct 30 2003, 08:18 AM
    Of course, given the current state of vote number 4, it might end up in a tie and that would give us our comittee of six anyway&#33;

    Paul
    Or maybe the same thing will happen with this vote as happened with the previous one.

    ie the poll stayed open after 9am and the vote that Paul Blitz needed to pip Lost in Space was cast well after 9am. About 15 minutes past if my memory serves me well.

    Elections should end at a set time. "about 10am" is not good enough.
    Muggle - One Voice - One Vote

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Stevenage, Herts
    Posts
    87

    Default

    I do not wish to become embroiled in this one though I have to admit I did find it just a little odd that, having been in the lead for 11 of the 14 days I was eventually "pipped" at the post by my contender receiving one vote a day for the last three days.

    :huh:

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    209

    Default

    Originally posted by Muggle@Oct 30 2003, 12:24 PM

    Or maybe the same thing will happen with this vote as happened with the previous one.

    ie the poll stayed open after 9am and the vote that Paul Blitz needed to pip Lost in Space was cast well after 9am. About 15 minutes past if my memory serves me well.
    Alex, Are you making an accusation here ?

    The log shows that the last vote was cast at 1066723381 (UNIX DATE). This translates to 08:03 server time (which is GMT).

    So, that is three minutes after 9:00 BST. (So your memory does not serve you well)

    That means that LIS had another 57 minutes to get another vote in. That sounds to me like it was in his favour &#33;

    Elections should end at a set time. "about 10am" is not good enough.
    I&#39;m so sorry that I cannot dedicate my whole life to the GAGB, sometimes I have to do other things in order to earn a living. I have to put my paying clients first and if I am not available EXACTLY at 10:00 to close a poll, better to close it late than early, or perhaps you would prefer that.

    Usual story, you&#39;re damned whatever you do &#33;
    <span style=\'font-size:10pt;line-height:100%\'><span style=\'color:green\'><span style=\'font-family:Arial\'>totally brassed off </span></span></span>

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Originally posted by Tim and June@Oct 30 2003, 01:44 PM
    The log shows that the last vote was cast at 1066723381 (UNIX DATE). This translates to 08:03 server time (which is GMT).

    So, that is three minutes after 9:00 BST. (So your memory does not serve you well)

    As I didn&#39;t vote in the last round, the result doesn&#39;t bother me one way or another. I just thought it was a bit quaint having an election finishing at "about" some time or another.

    I didn&#39;t realise that someone had to physically close the poll. I assumed that it could be set to end automatically.

    The last vote was cast at 9:03. I thought it was later. I stand corrected.
    Muggle - One Voice - One Vote

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Originally posted by Tim and June@Oct 30 2003, 01:44 PM
    Alex, Are you making an accusation here ?
    Alex? Who said my name was Alex?
    Muggle - One Voice - One Vote

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •