BritinUSA Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 Link to BOD Minutes : Click Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagellord Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 This will be an interesting time for the org. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Bagellord said: This will be an interesting time for the org. not sure why it would be any more interesting than any other time. Other than a few internet mudslingers and pot-stirrers, almost everyone seems to like the way things are run, and to trust the directors they've seen at matches for years to continue taking care of the details. At local matches there is absolutely zero concern about this stuff, even among the more serious shooters, and M's and GM's and RO's and MD's and people who travel to major matches. Tempest in a teapot imho. Good job by the BOD to ignore the noise and focus on the signal. Edited January 25, 2022 by motosapiens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schutzenmeister Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 I just tried to read through all of the minutes ... My head hurts! I'll look at it again later. Maybe it'll make more sense the second time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 25, 2022 Author Share Posted January 25, 2022 The BOD have changed USPSA from a member-centric organization to one that governs entirely from within with no regard for the membership. They have changed the bylaws to give in-elected individuals far more power than ever before and they have willfully delayed the special election in order to ram those changes home. They have then altered the number of votes necessary to undo these changes. If you think this is a good thing then you are likely in a very small minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 25, 2022 Author Share Posted January 25, 2022 1 minute ago, Schutzenmeister said: I just tried to read through all of the minutes ... My head hurts! I'll look at it again later. Maybe it'll make more sense the second time. It won’t. They are want to alter the bylaws to prevent a future president from having any powers despite the fact that for 6 years they voted in complete lock-step with the previous president that gave him all that power. Hypocrisy rules, arrogance rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomstick303 Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 3 minutes ago, BritinUSA said: They have then altered the number of votes necessary to undo these changes. This was very telling of the board's intentions. This was my biggest issues with the Bylaw changes. Nothing good comes Governing bodies that create legislation, and make it almost impossible to change the very rule(s) they themselves voted to change. You are spot on how hypocritical the board is. The absolutely gave the prior Mike Foley all of that power. Not only that, the board agreed with many of Foley's ridiculous rulings in the process. Then they act like this was all of the Foley's doing and that their hands are clean in this whole mess. Nothing could be further from the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrumpyOne Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 You know, I really wanted this thread to stay open, but I don't think it will. Eight posts in, and the political posts are already there. If you want it to stay unlocked, stay off the political stuff. This is the only warning that will be provided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southpaw Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 So did they just approve the draft bylaws, or were any changes made based on member comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 (edited) 37 minutes ago, BritinUSA said: The BOD have changed USPSA from a member-centric organization to one that governs entirely from within with no regard for the membership. They have changed the bylaws to give in-elected individuals far more power than ever before and they have willfully delayed the special election in order to ram those changes home. It doesn't bother me if you believe that, but imho it's totally wrong. The area directors you say have no regard for the membership are actually elected by the membership. I strongly suggest that if you think your view is popular, you consider running for area director. Edited January 25, 2022 by motosapiens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 25, 2022 Author Share Posted January 25, 2022 My AD is Matt Hopkins, one of only two AD’s that listened to their members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 (edited) 24 minutes ago, BritinUSA said: My AD is Matt Hopkins, one of only two AD’s that listened to their members. I know for sure that A1 (bruce gary) listened to his members. He explained his reasoning, solicited our feedback and acted appropriately. I've worked with 2 of the other AD's at major matches, and I have a hard time believing they have anything except the best interests of the sport in mind. The tiny minority of members who have a complaint should run for AD (or president) themselves.... Edited January 25, 2022 by motosapiens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJH Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 All I really want to know is, can I use whatever Hammer I want on my CZ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 26, 2022 Author Share Posted January 26, 2022 The only sure way to know if an AD acted appropriately is for USPSA to publish all the comments that were received (via comment forms and emails) regarding the new bylaws so the members can see what percentage of the comments were negative vs positive. This would be transparency… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outerlimits Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 6 minutes ago, BritinUSA said: The only sure way to know if an AD acted appropriately is for USPSA to publish all the comments that were received (via comment forms and emails) regarding the new bylaws so the members can see what percentage of the comments were negative vs positive. This would be transparency… agreed-but that will never happen. never... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, BritinUSA said: The only sure way to know if an AD acted appropriately is for USPSA to publish all the comments that were received (via comment forms and emails) regarding the new bylaws so the members can see what percentage of the comments were negative vs positive. This would be transparency… you would also need to publish all the individual phone calls, and fb private messages, and in-person conversations, and section meetings and so forth on the topic. which is kind of silly, when you think about it. We elect directors for a reason. fwiw, there's no actual reason for a director to take a vote and do whatever his area's members tell him to do. Most of us vote for directors because we trust their motives and their judgement, and we recognize that they have more experience and involvement and knowledge. Even if a director hears from 5 disgruntled internet complainers, he still might decide that the best course for the organization is not to do whatever the pot-stirrers say to do. Its certainly reasonable to notice that many of the disgruntled people appear to not actually understand the issues, or the history behind them. Edited January 26, 2022 by motosapiens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ltdmstr Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 1 hour ago, BritinUSA said: The only sure way to know if an AD acted appropriately is for USPSA to publish all the comments that were received (via comment forms and emails) regarding the new bylaws so the members can see what percentage of the comments were negative vs positive. Sorry, but that's not how it works with a representative form of government or organization. It's not a referendum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 26, 2022 Author Share Posted January 26, 2022 (edited) I think we understand the issues far better than you think. I have 30 years invested in this sport, I’ve seen a lot of good things and some really bad ones. This is the worst. Edited January 26, 2022 by BritinUSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 26, 2022 Author Share Posted January 26, 2022 4 minutes ago, ltdmstr said: Sorry, but that's not how it works with a representative form of government or organization. It's not a referendum. Then why solicit opinions if they are going to ignore them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 (edited) 21 minutes ago, BritinUSA said: Then why solicit opinions if they are going to ignore them? I don't see any indication that feedback was ignored. Quite the opposite actually. Just because it didn't go your way doesn't mean anything got ignored. It actually makes sense that it didn't go your way when you consider the results of the last USPSA presidential election. The overwhelming majority of active uspsa members seem to disagree with you on almost everything. Edited January 26, 2022 by motosapiens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sc68cal Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 It looks like some of the feedback from members at USPSA open nationals, in regards to Steel Challenge, have been acted upon. There's now a Steel Challenge Committee. That's good, since Steel Challenge has rebounded from the pandemic more than USPSA has, per the activity stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 26, 2022 Author Share Posted January 26, 2022 15 minutes ago, motosapiens said: I don't see any indication that feedback was ignored. Quite the opposite actually. Just because it didn't go your way doesn't mean anything got ignored. So you think two of the AD’s got more negative feedback, while the other six AD’s got more positive feedback. This seems statistically unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester121 Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 1 hour ago, BritinUSA said: So you think two of the AD’s got more negative feedback, while the other six AD’s got more positive feedback. This seems statistically unlikely. How are you so convinced that A3 and A4 members at large agree with you? Couldn't A3 and A4 have just voted their consciences, feedback be damned? At least one of them seemed to have made up his mind months ago. Very obtuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 1 hour ago, motosapiens said: Other than a few internet mudslingers and pot-stirrers, almost everyone seems to like the way things are run, At local matches there is absolutely zero concern about this stuff, even among the more serious shooters, and M's and GM's and RO's and MD's and people who travel to major matches. We talk about it quite a bit around here actually. While it may not be close to a majority it’s certainly more than a few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted January 26, 2022 Share Posted January 26, 2022 13 hours ago, BritinUSA said: So you think two of the AD’s got more negative feedback, while the other six AD’s got more positive feedback. This seems statistically unlikely. I have a statistics background, and it doesn't seem at all unlikely to me. Certainly the pot-stirring perpetrators seem to carry more sway in certain parts of the country. But it doesn't really matter. We don't elect directors to count our feedback and respond as if it were a referendum. We elect them to take that feedback into consideration along with their own knowledge of the situation and their own judgment. I respect the judgement of both those 2 AD's who voted against the proposal (one of whom I know casually, the other not at all) and also the judgement of those AD's who voted for the proposal (several of whom I have worked with and am on good terms with and with whom I have had long conversations with them on uspsa topics). The latest uspsa podcast features some discussion with directors on both sides of the vote. It's a worth a listen if you want information from a first-hand source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now