What national HG orgs publish executive voting records?

A discussion restricted to the topic of hang gliding.
User avatar
Davis
Site Admin
Posts: 15438
Joined: Thu, Feb 27 2003, 06:38:33 pm
Location: On the road, USA

Post by Davis »

Just to be clear. Almost nothing happens in the general meeting where these votes take place. All the real work is done in committee.
User avatar
Jacmac
Posts: 1994
Joined: Thu, Apr 28 2005, 03:48:16 pm
Location: San Diego, California

Post by Jacmac »

That's fine about the committees doing all of the real work, but I assume you don't have a problem with the director's votes being recorded and published by the USHPA?
Brian "The Capitalist Snake" McMahon
Look out for the force without form…
User avatar
Davis
Site Admin
Posts: 15438
Joined: Thu, Feb 27 2003, 06:38:33 pm
Location: On the road, USA

Post by Davis »

I don't have any problems at all.
User avatar
Bill C.
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon, Dec 06 2010, 02:21:25 pm
Location: Retired

Post by Bill C. »

Mgforbes wrote:There *is* a record; just go read the minutes, posted on the USHPA website in the members' section.
Nearly all of the decisions are unanimous; for those that are not, we typically record at least the number
of votes for and against. If it's controversial, really important or one of the supermajority questions
where we need a minimum of 17 votes in favor, we'll do a roll call vote. But for routine stuff that's
not controversial, we don't go through the delay of doing an official roll call. In general, if there's a
topic of interest, and your RD cast a vote, it was a vote with the majority unless otherwise noted.
I just ran back through the minutes for the past few years, and in those cases where a vote was
not unanimous, the dissent was recorded by name. There were a few roll call votes in there too,
and they're all duly recorded.

The board operates mostly by consensus; it's much different from Congress in that regard. We
mostly all get along well, and we hash out the details in committee meetings before the general
session. By the time we get to general session, the committee report is what we're voting on,
and it may get tweaked a bit if somebody has a question or problem. Once we've discussed it
in general session it gets voted on, and almost always it's a unanimous approval. For example,
go read the spring 2013 minutes. You'll find that almost all of the reports were approved
unanimously, except Dennis Pagen voted "no" on the Spring 2014 meeting location. Some of the
reports were amended during general session, with the motion and second recorded by name.

If there's some topic on which you think your RD voted "the wrong way", then take it up with
them and discuss it! The minutes are posted for your reference, all the way back to the beginning.
If some energetic soul (you, for example, since you seem to care) wants to go through them and
generate a spreadsheet showing how every director voted as recorded in the minutes, by all
means go forth and do so! Without the context provided by the minutes, so you know what the
topic was, it's fairly meaningless to do so. But if it floats your boat, go right ahead!

MGF
Not betraying someone’s trust in me is of the utmost consideration.
Having someone’s trust and not doing everything in my power to avoid even the appearance of impropriety in regards to their trust would be absolutely brain dead on my part.
Therefore when it is so easy to eliminate the appearance of impropriety I’m highly suspicious of any argument put forward that in essence says, “Trust me.”
User avatar
Fred Wilson
Posts: 786
Joined: Sun, Mar 15 2009, 05:30:24 pm
Location: Vernon BC Canada

Post by Fred Wilson »

Devé Hiss sez: "I don't have any problems at all."

Oh man, thanks for that bud. You have NO IDEA how much I needed a hearty laugh right now. Just the ticket! :lol: :lol:
Last edited by Fred Wilson on Sun, Dec 15 2013, 04:38:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
David Glover
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri, Oct 03 2003, 08:33:17 am

Post by David Glover »

Mark Forbes is probably the hardest working, transparent, long term helper the USHPA has involved in the organization. When he talks and or takes a stand it is probably well thought out, fair and reasoned.
David H Glover
User avatar
Sam Kellner
Posts: 396
Joined: Mon, Mar 31 2003, 07:50:31 pm
Location: hwy83@ Leakey,Tx

Post by Sam Kellner »

Davis wrote:Just to be clear…
Right on this one Fred.

:36_12_6:
Eric J
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu, May 02 2013, 04:57:56 pm

Post by Eric J »

David Glover wrote:Mark Forbes is probably the hardest working, transparent, long term helper the USHPA has involved in the organization. When he talks and or takes a stand it is probably well thought out, fair and reasoned.
Seconded, thirded, forthed?, etc. in my limited experience.
User avatar
ThinAirDesigns
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue, Oct 28 2008, 01:37:33 pm

Post by ThinAirDesigns »

David Glover wrote:Mark Forbes is probably the hardest working, transparent, long term helper the USHPA has involved in the organization. When he talks and or takes a stand it is probably well thought out, fair and reasoned.
Pretty much agree with your first comment -- though I have disagreed often with MF, I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

As to your second sentence, the key word is "probably" and in this case his position is NOT fair. I'm very, VERY surprised that you vocally hold governmental transparency as one of your key issues and yet excuse the continued lack of such with the USHPA. It's a shame really.

JB
User avatar
ThinAirDesigns
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue, Oct 28 2008, 01:37:33 pm

Post by ThinAirDesigns »

Bill C. wrote:Not betraying someone’s trust in me is of the utmost consideration.
Having someone’s trust and not doing everything in my power to avoid even the appearance of impropriety in regards to their trust would be absolutely brain dead on my part.
Therefore when it is so easy to eliminate the appearance of impropriety I’m highly suspicious of any argument put forward that in essence says, “Trust me.”
Spot on.

The "most votes are easy to figure out" routine is tiresome BS. It's not the common, run of the mill vote that someone is generally going to care about anyway -- it's the important and sometimes controversial votes that tell us the most about our representatives. From personal experience I can vouch that it is at THESE times that the USH(G)PA has most often hidden the individual results from the members.

It's not an accident -- it's intentional hiding. It also likely won't change because of general apathy among members. Tis what it is.

JB