tigre944 wrote:Shawn,

Double-points and the Friday aren't linked. I'm okay giving up the Friday (I'll just pay more through a trackday organizer). Can you still consider doing double-points?

BTW: I just signed up for the Friday trackday with Ride Red Shift -- they emailed out and appear to own that date already.

Hi Steve,

During the discussions about the final weekend the double-points and/or double round were ideas towards saving Sept 18th. With the day off the table, the general thought was to keep at least Sunday's program and points, the same.

Is it still possible to have a double-points weekend? Anything is possible if the membership wanted it. It would need a lot of support to change at this late date though. If you feel there is enough support, I would suggest conducting a petition at the next round and submit it to the BOD.

As of late Friday morning it wasn't confirmed, so it's good to hear Donna has decided to take Sept 18th.


Shawn

Sounds good -- thanks, Shawn.

Shawn, I understand that there is a 'race event' happening at Laguna Seca, as well as a Kegwin's Track Day, on Sept. 11-13. There is no sound limit.

This would have been a perfect AFM event! I'm sure that it only became available at the last moment, so AFM couldn't capitalize on it, but please consider approaching Laguna Seca mgmt. to have an AFM event there next year. Certainly it is an available date(s) now that AMA isn't doing their Sept. race weekend there.

This was discussed at last night's board meeting. Obviously not for this year, but there are considerations for possible events at Laguna in the future. Don't hold your breath - it would still be _very_ expensive if possible at all, but Laguna seems to have opened the door a little.

Regards,
Mike

since this is a sticky post topic, i assume this is the right forum.......

a) where is the november meeting agenda and minutes ?

b) how is that new board policy regarding timely minutes distribution working out ?

PantyBuncher wrote:since this is a sticky post topic, i assume this is the right forum.......

a) where is the november meeting agenda and minutes ?

b) how is that new board policy regarding timely minutes distribution working out ?

The minutes are being approved as we speak. The difficulty with approving minutes away from the BOD meetings is: a) getting all 11 members to respond (vacation/work) and b) all votes must be unanimous to pass if done electronically. At the meetings themselves it's by majority vote. So if you have any revisions, (which Nov's had a couple), they get sent back to the secretary for revision, and then get sent back out again for vote. Once again all 11 members must vote yea or the minutes don't pass approval until the next BOD meeting. We're getting there and making sure the notes are accurate when published.

The policy is to get them out within 10 days which is quicker than waiting until the next BOD meeting. As with anything new there will be a few hiccups along the way. The plus side is that all the current BOD members are on e-mail with has not been the case in the past.

Shawn

[The plus side is that all the current BOD members are on e-mail with has not been the case in the past]

that's great, the BOD members can quibble over whether it should be written as your you're or yore. none of that changes the fact that the members still haven't gotten the info. attributing the lack of timely distribution to a desire for accuracy certainly does nothing to answer the question as to where the agenda went. is that still under review also, or also a hiccup because it's new ? sheesh man, it's not rocket science, it's a 6th grade paper.

PantyBuncher wrote:[The plus side is that all the current BOD members are on e-mail with has not been the case in the past]

that's great, the BOD members can quibble over whether it should be written as your you're or yore. none of that changes the fact that the members still haven't gotten the info. attributing the lack of timely distribution to a desire for accuracy certainly does nothing to answer the question as to where the agenda went. is that still under review also, or also a hiccup because it's new ? sheesh man, it's not rocket science, it's a 6th grade paper.

there were some concerns about past practice of publishing minutes prior to approval because the corrected versions were never put up and this BOD does not want to publish anything inaccurate. It would be nice if there were a way to get the info out prior to the minutes, but that's been it's own challenge.

I've been doing the recordings for most of the meetings and those can get approved quicker sometimes, but this month I lost my sync cradle for my recording pen and the replacement is on backorder. I suppose if I order a new one ($250) I can use the cradle from that, but it seems a bit overboard.

Any ideas out there about how to get the info to the members earlier in such a way that it can't be disseminated outside the membership and can be updated when changes are needed would be appreciated, i am sure.

let's see, which option really serves the members best:

a) minutes posted quickly, a risk of small discrepancies slipping into the minutes, to be corrected later.

b) no information given to the members, no risk of discrepancies.

c) month lag time to allow board review, a risk of small discrepancies slipping into the minutes, to be corrected later.

obviously, the board is thinking B is Best. but look, C is virtually the same risk. and, since the board is never accountable anyway, where is the actual harm ? i mean, they haven't even bothered to complete eric's crash report, and that's been over 6 months ago, a lifetime, and there is no accountability for that. so what. if you can get away with that, i don't think anyone will mind a few misspellings.


<<Any ideas out there about how to get the info to the members earlier in such a way that it can't be disseminated outside the membership and can be updated when changes are needed would be appreciated, i am sure.>>

there is only one absolutely sure and secure way that will prevent the information from being being disseminated out side the club, and we have that nearly airtight secure system now - disinterest.

with the way the minutes are cooked for a month removing information, what could possibly be in them that isn't ok to be public knowledge anyway ? why do recordings need to 'get approved' ? what's to approve, do we re-mix to make it sound like Ginger's balls really have dropped ? do you really see the afm meetings being found on thepiratebay.org ???

still no one saying who's dog ate the agenda.

it's good of you to record the mtgs for the members. that's a bonus. but it's actually the BOD's responsibility, and even paid job.

ooppps i made a typo.....it should have read:

....but look, A and C are virtually the same risk....

see how easy it is to make corrections ?

As the former secretary, I understand the board's concern about "inaccurate" information being posted but by posted "unofficial minutes" it allows not only the board members to comment and correct statements attributed to them but also to the members present at the board meeting. I see no reason why "unofficial minutes" should not be posted contemporaneous to the adjournment of the meeting. The official edited minutes can be posted upon approval.

Scotty

Agreed, using the label unofficial absolves the need for 100% accuracy and allows for cleanup at a later date. Late posting of information is as Andy notes a sure path to disinterest which generally insures a lack of involvement by folks well occupied with their own lives.

I agree as well.

Scotty, I liked the way you posted the minutes right away (unofficial), often solicited input before the agenda closed and usually posted the agenda before the meeting.

I brought up the unofficial minutes thing at a recent meeting and was given the explanation I provided.

Hopefully, Chris and the BOD can come up with something that works better.

This really is not a BOD issue. This is a Secretary issue. The Secretary has the authority by the position. Chris does not "need" the board to authorize him to do it. Just like Shawn does not "need" the board's authorization to negotiate contracts on the AFM's behalf.

There is a subtle difference between the duties and obligations of a board member and an officer. It just so happens that all of the officers are board members in this case but the officers are responsible for certain duties. With their position comes certain authority, both expressly and impliedly.

Scotty

are the top 3 girls going to get awards/plaques at the banquet for formula afemme? do we (and a guest) get to go for free?