Re: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] [Bitching & the Caver]
Geoff and Jacqui make a good point, the TSA is nothing without the membership. Their opinions do matter and should at least be considered. I wrote my first message under the assumption that they were being heard. I guess, to me it is a little like Paris Hilton, she was really into the Vote or Die thing for John Kerry, seems she forgot you actually needed to register to vote... She made a good impact but in the end, the strongest thing she could have done was unavailable to her. Where I disagree with them, is that attending the meeting and voting is the strongest way to influence change. I think talking to others and expressing opinions does have a good deal of influence. As a TSA officer, I did that a good bit to see what people wanted. I think Mark and the others do as well. I also think it means very little if you don't follow through and vote and the other side does and you loose. Seems weird and a bit self defeating, if you want something, go get it, don't just talk about it and then passively walk away when you don't get your way... Now in the end, it takes all of us, not voting is fine, I actually didn't see either of you upset about the outcome, which is good, I was speaking to those angry folks who don't bother to be involved at all but then want to be considered. I'm not sure if I'm the one who belittled your opinions for not being there to vote, if I did than it was unintended, I completely understand things happen, I think freedom of speech is huge and encourage it, but in the end, if you don't get your/our way, tough cookies. Joe On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Geoff H wrote: > > I don't regularly follow cavetex, and more rarely post, but I think there's > one or two recurrent themes here that merit reflection. > > My membership should not mean any less to the organization because I missed > the last meeting. There's just one tier of membership. (some organizations > have multiple tiers - sustaining, associate, voting/non-voting, whatever. I > don't want that level of complication in the TSA.) The TSA exists to serve > the interests of its members. This is probably constrained somewhat by > language somewhere about serving the interests of caving in texas, > conservation, and maybe one or two more things of that sort, but for the > most part, it should do what a significant portion of its membership wants > it to do. It doesn't matter if they go to meetings, or post on Cavetex, or > just sit quietly at home and never go out. If they are members, the > organization should consider what they want. > > Conversely, my desires for what I want the organization to do should not > mean more if I did attend the last meeting. Regardless of if an opinion was > proffered at the last meeting, or at a grotto meeting, via cavetex, while > caving, or in any fashion, my expectation as a member is that the officers > would take that opinion, consider how it refects to the desires of the > membership as a whole, and act only with thought and consideration of all > viewpoints. > > It can be very difficult to understand the opinions and desires of the > membership, as it is often contradictory and usually obscure. Most members > don't express an opinion, and although they often may not have one, the > organization cannot safely presume to know, much less act, on any action of > significance without understanding what its members want. It takes effort > for an organization to understand its members. Unfortunately, it's much > easier to assume what people want, or perhaps worse, what they need. In rare > circumstances this works extremely well, but in most, it results in friction > and controversy, and will drive people away. > > The level of effort it takes to understand the wants and needs of the > members often means that the organization is hampered, and does not quickly > move into doing new things. Fortunately, this is usually what the members > want. For the most part, people become involved with something they like, so > naturally the organization is doing what they want it to do. When the > organization does something the members don't want, or just moves too > quickly, the membership may object, or may just cease to be involved. > > People are usually open to compromise, but when an organization does things > that they don't want, they usually don't complain as much as they just fade > away. They won't volunteer, they won't show up at the next meeting. They > won't bother to send in a check next time, or the time after that. Members > usually want the organization to stick to the fundamentals and not get too > far from the basics. A few people are there because they like the mechanics > of running an organization, or the politics, or a handful of other reasons, > but most are members because it furthers the goals of what they do outside > of the organization. If it hampers rather than helps, if it distracts rather > than informs, it's going to be something to be avoided rather than
Re: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] [Bitching & the Caver
You're quite welcome, I enjoy helping out where I can. When the TSA was formed, the meetings and letters were the only way to take care of business. With the advances in technology, more can be done, but there is a cost associated with it, in either capital dollars or time spent/donated, or both. I do wholeheartedly agree with you, things need to be moved into the modern age, and it will eventually be here. In the mean time, we have to make do with what we have. Charles On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Geoff H wrote: > > Charles, > > I recognize that this mail list has no formal affiliation to the TSA. I did > not mean to imply so, and apologize if I did. > Beyond that, I don't know much about the running of the list, but I do > appreciate your doing so. Thank you! > > Regarding the TSA, I disagree with you in that I don't think there is any > 'official' way to voice views and concerns to the TSA (short of certified > letters, court orders and that sort of thing, which I hope we can agree is > out of the current context.) Opinions technically mean nothing to the > organization, at a meeting or otherwise. Motions, nominations, and > ultimately votes are the only way to officially register anything resembling > an opinion. 'Meeting opinions', 'cavetex opinions', and 'posse talk' are > equivalent. Technically, those elected can choose to weigh them as they see > fit. Taking into account the size of the state and distribution of the > membership, the relative few meetings per year, and the nature of the > business, I only propose what I consider the best and fairest method of > doing so. > > Really, thanks again for the mailing list support. > > Geoff
RE: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] [Bitching & the Caver]
Charles, I recognize that this mail list has no formal affiliation to the TSA. I did not mean to imply so, and apologize if I did. Beyond that, I don't know much about the running of the list, but I do appreciate your doing so. Thank you! Regarding the TSA, I disagree with you in that I don't think there is any 'official' way to voice views and concerns to the TSA (short of certified letters, court orders and that sort of thing, which I hope we can agree is out of the current context.) Opinions technically mean nothing to the organization, at a meeting or otherwise. Motions, nominations, and ultimately votes are the only way to officially register anything resembling an opinion. 'Meeting opinions', 'cavetex opinions', and 'posse talk' are equivalent. Technically, those elected can choose to weigh them as they see fit. Taking into account the size of the state and distribution of the membership, the relative few meetings per year, and the nature of the business, I only propose what I consider the best and fairest method of doing so. Really, thanks again for the mailing list support. Geoff > Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:56:43 -0600 > Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] > [Bitching & the Caver] > From: wo...@justfamily.org > To: g...@io.com > CC: gho...@hotmail.com; texascavers@texascavers.com > > Geoff, you make some very good points, but keep in mind, the only > official way to voice your views and concerns to the TSA is at a > meeting, or perhaps writing to the officers, but I don't know if that > would be allowed. > > While a lot of people associate this mailing list with the TSA, it is > in fact very separate. No organization is tied to this mailing list > other than the website, http://texascavers.com/ > > The TSA has offered to help pay for hosting, as a few individuals, but > I have politely turned them down, I do it as a service to the > community, it's my small way of giving back. > > While everyone is free to post just about anything here (following the > rules at the above site, of course), do not feel that this is any way > of discussing any official business of the TSA. > > Charles > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Geoff H wrote: > > > > I don't regularly follow cavetex, and more rarely post, but I think there's > > one or two recurrent themes here that merit reflection. > > > > My membership should not mean any less to the organization because I missed > > the last meeting. There's just one tier of membership. (some organizations > > have multiple tiers - sustaining, associate, voting/non-voting, whatever. I > > don't want that level of complication in the TSA.) The TSA exists to serve > > the interests of its members. This is probably constrained somewhat by > > language somewhere about serving the interests of caving in texas, > > conservation, and maybe one or two more things of that sort, but for the > > most part, it should do what a significant portion of its membership wants > > it to do. It doesn't matter if they go to meetings, or post on Cavetex, or > > just sit quietly at home and never go out. If they are members, the > > organization should consider what they want. _ Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_explore_012009
Re: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] [Bitching & the Caver]
Thank you! If all goes well, I made the last one, but you had another thing in NM I think at the same time. On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Bill Bentley wrote: > I commend you... > > Oh isn't it surprising how many people still call it cavetex? > > I am glad you are able to keep it privately funded.. > I have done the same with www.caver.net.. > Well keep up the good work... > > Are you going to be at the Spring TSA meeting? > Bill > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Charles Goldsmith" > To: > Cc: ; > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2009 5:56 PM > Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] > [Bitching & the Caver] > > >> Geoff, you make some very good points, but keep in mind, the only >> official way to voice your views and concerns to the TSA is at a >> meeting, or perhaps writing to the officers, but I don't know if that >> would be allowed. >> >> While a lot of people associate this mailing list with the TSA, it is >> in fact very separate. No organization is tied to this mailing list >> other than the website, http://texascavers.com/ >> >> The TSA has offered to help pay for hosting, as a few individuals, but >> I have politely turned them down, I do it as a service to the >> community, it's my small way of giving back. >> >> While everyone is free to post just about anything here (following the >> rules at the above site, of course), do not feel that this is any way >> of discussing any official business of the TSA. >> >> Charles >> >> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Geoff H wrote: >> > >> > I don't regularly follow cavetex, and more rarely post, but I think > there's >> > one or two recurrent themes here that merit reflection. >> > >> > My membership should not mean any less to the organization because I > missed >> > the last meeting. There's just one tier of membership. (some > organizations >> > have multiple tiers - sustaining, associate, voting/non-voting, > whatever. I >> > don't want that level of complication in the TSA.) The TSA exists to > serve >> > the interests of its members. This is probably constrained somewhat by >> > language somewhere about serving the interests of caving in texas, >> > conservation, and maybe one or two more things of that sort, but for the >> > most part, it should do what a significant portion of its membership > wants >> > it to do. It doesn't matter if they go to meetings, or post on Cavetex, > or >> > just sit quietly at home and never go out. If they are members, the >> > organization should consider what they want. >> >> - >> Visit our website: http://texascavers.com >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com >> For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com >> > >
Re: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] [Bitching & the Caver]
I commend you... Oh isn't it surprising how many people still call it cavetex? I am glad you are able to keep it privately funded.. I have done the same with www.caver.net.. Well keep up the good work... Are you going to be at the Spring TSA meeting? Bill - Original Message - From: "Charles Goldsmith" To: Cc: ; Sent: Monday, January 19, 2009 5:56 PM Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] [Bitching & the Caver] > Geoff, you make some very good points, but keep in mind, the only > official way to voice your views and concerns to the TSA is at a > meeting, or perhaps writing to the officers, but I don't know if that > would be allowed. > > While a lot of people associate this mailing list with the TSA, it is > in fact very separate. No organization is tied to this mailing list > other than the website, http://texascavers.com/ > > The TSA has offered to help pay for hosting, as a few individuals, but > I have politely turned them down, I do it as a service to the > community, it's my small way of giving back. > > While everyone is free to post just about anything here (following the > rules at the above site, of course), do not feel that this is any way > of discussing any official business of the TSA. > > Charles > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Geoff H wrote: > > > > I don't regularly follow cavetex, and more rarely post, but I think there's > > one or two recurrent themes here that merit reflection. > > > > My membership should not mean any less to the organization because I missed > > the last meeting. There's just one tier of membership. (some organizations > > have multiple tiers - sustaining, associate, voting/non-voting, whatever. I > > don't want that level of complication in the TSA.) The TSA exists to serve > > the interests of its members. This is probably constrained somewhat by > > language somewhere about serving the interests of caving in texas, > > conservation, and maybe one or two more things of that sort, but for the > > most part, it should do what a significant portion of its membership wants > > it to do. It doesn't matter if they go to meetings, or post on Cavetex, or > > just sit quietly at home and never go out. If they are members, the > > organization should consider what they want. > > - > Visit our website: http://texascavers.com > To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com > For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com >
Re: [Texascavers] Viewpoint of a TSA Member (was RE: [Texascavers] [Bitching & the Caver]
Geoff, you make some very good points, but keep in mind, the only official way to voice your views and concerns to the TSA is at a meeting, or perhaps writing to the officers, but I don't know if that would be allowed. While a lot of people associate this mailing list with the TSA, it is in fact very separate. No organization is tied to this mailing list other than the website, http://texascavers.com/ The TSA has offered to help pay for hosting, as a few individuals, but I have politely turned them down, I do it as a service to the community, it's my small way of giving back. While everyone is free to post just about anything here (following the rules at the above site, of course), do not feel that this is any way of discussing any official business of the TSA. Charles On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Geoff H wrote: > > I don't regularly follow cavetex, and more rarely post, but I think there's > one or two recurrent themes here that merit reflection. > > My membership should not mean any less to the organization because I missed > the last meeting. There's just one tier of membership. (some organizations > have multiple tiers - sustaining, associate, voting/non-voting, whatever. I > don't want that level of complication in the TSA.) The TSA exists to serve > the interests of its members. This is probably constrained somewhat by > language somewhere about serving the interests of caving in texas, > conservation, and maybe one or two more things of that sort, but for the > most part, it should do what a significant portion of its membership wants > it to do. It doesn't matter if they go to meetings, or post on Cavetex, or > just sit quietly at home and never go out. If they are members, the > organization should consider what they want.
