Proposed new USBCHA Forum

[amc]

Communication amongst HA Directors, Officers and Members has long been an issue in that organization. I don't think there are sinister reasons for this, but I do think the culture of the organization has evolved in such a way that director output and member input is somewhat difficult to achieve.

 

To that end, a few of us have created a Test Forum which we hope, if adopted by the HA Directors, would offer a place where ideas and suggestions could more freely flow back and forth from leaders to members. Current HA members and associate members along with Directors are strongly encouraged to sign up and try it out, to see how it 'feels'. We ask that you pick a username that easily identifies you so we can assure your HA membership status; we've made a few exceptions when the signature block adequately identifies the user.

 

We've got 22 members on the test forum and we need many more! Please sign up and add your comments, both positive and negative. We are beginning to think that the members really DON'T care about knowing what the Directors are discussing and thus don't care about being able to add their opinions in advance of official action!

 

The forum address is http://mywy.net/USBCHA_Test/index.php. Hope to see you there!

[Laurae]

Well, I'd be interested, but I'm not a member of the USBCHA (since I'm a novice), so I can't sign up for it.

[Sue R]

Well, I'd be interested, but I'm not a member of the USBCHA (since I'm a novice), so I can't sign up for it.

 

Being a novice doesn't prevent anyone from being a member, you will just be an Associate Member without voting privileges, just like me.

 

Here is the address for a membership application - http://www.usbcha.com/membership_application.htm

 

Being a member, with or without voting privileges, is an opportunity to support the working Border Collie.

[Laurae]

Yeah...I guess I didn't know that.

[grenzehund]

Well, I'd be interested, but I'm not a member of the USBCHA (since I'm a novice), so I can't sign up for it.

 

We novices can be associate members (without voting rights) for $25/year, and then can be part of the forum. Probably worthwhile!

 

Susan

[Shoofly]

I'm sorry, but i think this is a terrible idea. Directors ought to be able to have private conversations without the whole world listening in and commenting (either in the same board or on another). All something like this is going to do is force private conversations back to email or telephone, and then all the directors don't have access as they do on a board as it is now (the private USBCHA and ABCA boards supported on THIS forum). Directors need to be free to exchange information that may not be something that should be repeated publicly, without having to stop and think about who is reading what they say.

 

If you want more notice of what the board is doing, forthcoming actions, agendas, etc, there are better ways to accomplish that.

[Sue R]

Robin - I do think that there are conversations and matters that need to be private. But I would also like to see a forum that invites discussion and input from the membership.

 

I know that our current president posts some items here and elsewhere when they are under consideration, for which I am sure many people are grateful. It just seems that that is a lot that must be going on of which "run of the mill" members have no idea, and might like to know and be able to make comments or give input if they were aware of it.

 

I guess what I am saying is that I think there is good reason for both a private sort of forum (like on here) and a forum that gets ideas out to the membership, invites comment, and allows participation. Maybe the best way to do that would be for directors to have some sort of contact (mass email or whatever) with their districts, to get information out and solicit input. I don't even know if directors have any sort of contact with their districts for that purpose now.

[Shoofly]

I guess what I am saying is that I think there is good reason for both a private sort of forum (like on here) and a forum that gets ideas out to the membership, invites comment, and allows participation. Maybe the best way to do that would be for directors to have some sort of contact (mass email or whatever) with their districts, to get information out and solicit input. I don't even know if directors have any sort of contact with their districts for that purpose now.

 

 

So perhaps there should be an "announce only" kind of thingie set up and members can talk amongst themselves and make an effort to get opinions to the directors, instead of expecting directors to conduct board business where every crank in the world can bitch and moan and make the job of director even more onerous. I believe there's already a section on the USBCHA website for upcoming agendas and minutes etc. Why not make better use of that?

[blackacre]

Is this your idea Amy, that you hope to present to the Board as a useful device, or does it come directly from the Board?

Curious, since we already have this:

USBCHA yahoo group that hasn't been used in years, probably since Mike Canaday's time.

Andrea

[amc]

Robin writes:

I believe there's already a section on the USBCHA website for upcoming agendas and minutes etc. Why not make better use of that?

 

The problem with that suggestion as I see it, Robin, is that what gets posted there depends on someone else's labor (ie Francis, who has PLENTY to do) to edit the webpage. Not nearly as easy as you or me or another member just posting to a forum format such as this.

 

We currently have the forum set up with a Members section which would offer users the opportunity to discuss, and Directors could read and post there also. The Directors' sections can be read but not posted to by HA members.

 

Andrea writes:

Curious, since we already have this:

USBCHA yahoo group that hasn't been used in years, probably since Mike Canaday's time.

 

The Yahoo format is not very user-friendly, and many Directors found it too confusing and disjointed. This forum is much easier to organize, utilize and understand.

We have submitted a proposal to the Directors for their consideration.

[Shoofly]

The Directors' sections can be read but not posted to by HA members.

 

That's the part i don't like. Directors shouldn't have to stop and think about the "political correctness" of everything they have to say in conducting board business.

 

If you want to set up yet another public forum for people to talk about dog/HA stuff, go for it. I don't know why there's a need for another one myself, it'll just be yet another place for people to check in. I don't see why it can't be part of an established forum such as this one. If members want a voice, they should speak up and let the directors "spy" on them, instead of the other way around.

 

All of the directors are members of the BC boards already and discuss topics on private forums. I bet Eileen would be happy to set up a new section for HA members to discuss HA issues and let directors contribute or just read, as they see fit.

[Sue R]

All of the directors are members of the BC boards already and discuss topics on private forums. I bet Eileen would be happy to set up a new section for HA members to discuss HA issues and let directors contribute or just read, as they see fit.

 

That sounds like that could accomplish a way for members to directly input ideas and opinions, and interact with the directors, without the need for an additional forum, while still preserving a "confidential" format for directors to discuss issues in private. I think that would be a simpler and very functional way of accomplishing the idea of more member involvement and positive interaction.

[amc]

Robin, and anyone else with concerns and comments, it would be great if you would register for the Test Forum and post your opinions there.

 

I agree, it's possible or even likely that Directors can be checking here, and on the Working Stockdog Forum, and other places for member input, but it may not be clear to all Directors who actually IS a member (especially At-Large Directors who represent all of North America), AND, especially with a big board such as this, it's easy to get distracted in other topics and lose focus. It would be nice to have one place that members could go for HA business strictly.

 

I know what you're saying about the public-ness of having Directors' discussions out in the open. I was a director for 6 years, and there were things said that we shouldn't have had to listen to privately! But it wasn't necessarily good business that those things were said, or even in the best interest of the organization. Congress has C-SPAN and it doesn't seem to stifle debate.

[Shoofly]

I agree, it's possible or even likely that Directors can be checking here, and on the Working Stockdog Forum, and other places for member input, but it may not be clear to all Directors who actually IS a member (especially At-Large Directors who represent all of North America), AND, especially with a big board such as this, it's easy to get distracted in other topics and lose focus. It would be nice to have one place that members could go for HA business strictly.

 

Yes, exactly why i suggested a section for HA business/discussion only. There's no reason why there couldn't be a note to only post if you're a member. The HA might even pick up a member or two if non-members can read the forum (unlike the one you're proposing) and decide they'd like to join in.

 

I know what you're saying about the public-ness of having Directors' discussions out in the open. I was a director for 6 years, and there were things said that we shouldn't have had to listen to privately! But it wasn't necessarily good business that those things were said, or even in the best interest of the organization. Congress has C-SPAN and it doesn't seem to stifle debate.

 

I'm sorry, but if you think the pompous political grandstanding seen on C-Span is debate, we have a little disagreement here.

[Little Bo Boop]

That's the part i don't like. Directors shouldn't have to stop and think about the "political correctness" of everything they have to say in conducting board business.

 

If you want to set up yet another public forum for people to talk about dog/HA stuff, go for it. I don't know why there's a need for another one myself, it'll just be yet another place for people to check in. I don't see why it can't be part of an established forum such as this one. If members want a voice, they should speak up and let the directors "spy" on them, instead of the other way around.

 

All of the directors are members of the BC boards already and discuss topics on private forums. I bet Eileen would be happy to set up a new section for HA members to discuss HA issues and let directors contribute or just read, as they see fit.

 

 

 

Robin, thanks for saving me all the typing ;-) you said pretty much everything I wanted to say, and in particular,

 

"Directors shouldn't have to stop and think about the "political correctness" of everything they have to say in conducting board business'

 

 

IMHO, if you want to promote ill will and hard feelings amongst memebers and BOD alike, then by all means sign up for this new forum...although at the end of the day, I'm assuming the BOD will make the call as to whether they will support it or not. We got just a little taste of what it will be like on our TSDA forum. See if you'll even be able to get anybody to even run for board member when you have someone breathing down your neck and questioning every single purposal, and I do mean every single freakin' purposal. And guess what? Even after issues have been decided you get people who just won't let it go ;-( Nobody can work that way. While I am all for making public, board agenda items, this other "I have to be privy to every single thing thats going on with the BOD"...just doesn't work. You got a problem with how things are run? Run for president or board member. Oh! you did run for the board and you didn't get voted in? Well there ya have it. As I said we got just a taste of this at the TSDA, and the hard feelings and animosity amongst our members right now is very disheartening.

 

 

Betty

[Denise Wall]

Sorry, but I'm against this too for reasons already stated by Robin and Little Bo Boop.

[Pipedream Farm]

Sorry Amy,

 

I have enough experience to know what you're proposing won't work the way you want. BTW C-Span does not show the real work being done only the show that congress wants us to see. The real work goes on behind closed doors.

 

Mark

[Deacon Dog]

Is the forum supposed to be for all Board deliberations or just a central place for the Board to seek member input on select issues?

[juliepoudrier]

Here's my two cents. I have no real interest in following the actual deliberations the BOD makes. I don't need to "listen in" on their conversations. But it sure would be nice if our elected directors would solicit their district members' input before such decisions are deliberated and voted on by the BOD. Right now it seems that often the only way we hear about items for discussion before the board is if it manages to "trickle down" from District 1, which seems to have directors who do talk to their members and solicit opinions or if Hub comes to one of these forums and posts directly asking for opinions. If the forum was a place where directors or someone designated by the directors could post information on what's going before the board and then allow input from members (which the directors would actually read) then I think it could be useful. I'm happy as long as I think my opinions are being heard and taken into consideration. After that, I don't really care how they deliberate and I think having folks listen in would change the nature of the deliberations (and I don't know if that would be for the better or the worse, but I suspect that the important/hotly contested/controversial items would just be discussed elsewhere anyway), which I don't think would be helpful.

 

J.

[Wendy V]

I agree with what Julie stated above. Frankly, there needs to be some improvement on the communication between the BOD and the membership. In my district, we hear NOTHING about what is going on. Perhaps that is because there has been no standard of communication between the members and the board. Clearly there is a need. I don't need to listen in on deliberations, but I would like to know what is on the slate for discussion and to be able to express an opinion that has a chance of being heard.

[blackacre]

Well, I am certainly in favour of having the agenda for upcoming meetings posted somewhere, as well as having access to the minutes following meetings, which it is also reasonable to expect will be posted on a timely basis. This would allow members to have a reasonable sense of what is going on with their organization. A forum for members to provide input to their directors and the board at large would be nice too, but that could certainly be accommodated here on the Boards.

I really don't think it's appropriate to require the directors to provide real time access to their deliberations.

I'm also reluctant to sign on to what appears to me to be an end run around the Board by one or two members with the apparent intent of presenting them with a fait accompli, in the hopes of pressuring them into signing on. If it's an idea worth their (and our) consideration, it should be presented in the usual way, by adding it to the agenda of the annual members' meeting, where the appropriate wording to amend the constitution and/or by-laws can be voted on and input can be solicited. If the motion fails there, your right and privilege is to elect a more compliant board--if you can.

Don't get me wrong, I am favour of a certain degree of transparency and accountability, but it needs to be done the right way. We're a small organization of volunteers, and alienating the people we've elected is not the way to go about making a change.

Andrea

[Shoofly]

I'm also reluctant to sign on to what appears to me to be an end run around the Board by one or two members with the apparent intent of presenting them with a fait accompli, in the hopes of pressuring them into signing on.

 

I agree and have no intention of signing up for the "test forum" and adding anything to the "member count". I don't agree with it and i'm not giving any tacit approval by signing up.

[Guest carol campion]

A forum for members to provide input to their directors and the board at large would be nice too, but that could certainly be accommodated here on the Boards.

 

It was asked that this be posted here from the new site. It addresses the concern about this board not taking on the task. o one so far has, so here it is.

 

If it has been already posted, sorry for the repetition.

 

<<Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:55 pm Post subject:

For those discussing this on BC Boards, please understand that Eileen Stein was approached to do something like this, but declined for the reason that it was too management-intensive due to her involvement with BC Boards. That is why this was developed.

 

This forum will NOT be accessible by the "whole world", as BC Boards is, in read-only fashion except for the "private" areas. Only approved USBCHA members will have any access to this forum. It will be owned and operated by the USBCHA.

 

Gary>>

[Guest carol campion]

On a personal note, I want to say that I can understand Eileen not wanting to take on another project as she has enough to manage with this one.

 

Carol

[Shoofly]

I would not propose to Eileen that she (or anyone else) take on a project like the "test forum", where only members can join. That's where the work is, in maintaining membership, verifying who gets to join, etc.

 

What i would propose is just another section on these boards, along with a sticky asking that only members actually post, though anyone can read. I would imagine that would only take a few minutes to set up and there would be no maintenance as it would be self-policing.