USPSA BOD Minutes Posted - New BYLAWS are now in effect

[Darqusoull13]

2 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

I certainly made no such assumption. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

No worries. I know more shooters are on different sides of this thing right now than they have been on issues in the past. The most important thing is still growing the shooting sports. 

 

3 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

wait, wut? there must be some misunderstanding here. I am saying that when someone runs for AD, I'm going to be interested in what they are currently doing for the sport and how long they've been doing it.... their track record, so to speak...

I do agree that this has merit in looking at future candidates. There will be a lot of names tossed in the hat soon and it's important to know everyone's qualifications and values so we can make informed votes. 

[BritinUSA]

If there are a lot of candidates it’s going to be tough to determine who is best when there is no single online place where members and candidates can discuss issues, solutions etc.

[BMSMB]

21 hours ago, motosapiens said:

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....

Funny you should say that, I didn't even get a response from my email to him.

[Balakay]

31 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

If there are a lot of candidates it’s going to be tough to determine who is best when there is no single online place where members and candidates can discuss issues, solutions etc.

Some people like steak sauce, many don't.  Elections will have consequences...

[Racinready300ex]

41 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

If there are a lot of candidates it’s going to be tough to determine who is best when there is no single online place where members and candidates can discuss issues, solutions etc.

 

I imagine it'll just turn into voting for the guy that you know. The plus is now days all these pod casts are giving guys a platform to shine, or hang themselves.

[shred]

One of my favorite quotes

 

"People with guns shouldn't form clubs" (not feedback to USPSA, just an observation on this thread)

 

My other comment (which went to the USPSA comment form) was "when organizations start treating members like customers, members start acting like customers.  "

 

Up in the air how well that was taken.

 

[BritinUSA]

I know they actioned one of mine, and ignored the other.

Edited January 27, 2022 by BritinUSA

[twodownzero]

5 hours ago, motosapiens said:

That's a good thing. Of course a reasonable person would ask some of these far more interested people just what they have done for the organization to deserve consideration: How many matches directed, how many clubs started, how many national and area matches worked, etc....

 

I looked into the position, and it's far more commitment than I was ready to undertake, but perhaps the people upset about this are already giving alot back to the sport.

That's a very business-oriented way of looking at USPSA and certainly not what I am looking for to replace my Area Director when the time comes. 

[jester121]

I suggest people check out the USPSA podcast, and draw their own conclusions - are the directors big fat liars, or is there more nuance to these decisions than some people would like to admit.

[ltdmstr]

1 hour ago, jester121 said:

I suggest people check out the USPSA podcast, and draw their own conclusions - are the directors big fat liars, or is there more nuance to these decisions than some people would like to admit.

 

Is it posted somewhere other than apple?  When I try to open it, it just hangs.

[BritinUSA]

Not sure if it works on Audible: https://www.audible.com/pd/Podcast/B08K57ZH99

[ltdmstr]

25 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

Not sure if it works on Audible: https://www.audible.com/pd/Podcast/B08K57ZH99

 

Signed on and opened episode 5, but can't get it to play there either.

[ltdmstr]

Got it to play on the USPSA web site.  Duh!

[Bakerjd]

How come everyone keeps bringing up the fact the board was with Foley lock and step yet seems to forget the fact he was RE elected by the MEMBERSHIP. Wouldn't that make the membership just as culpable as the board? 

[vluc]

1 hour ago, Bakerjd said:

How come everyone keeps bringing up the fact the board was with Foley lock and step yet seems to forget the fact he was RE elected by the MEMBERSHIP. Wouldn't that make the membership just as culpable as the board? 

 

To a degree, we probably do, but we don't have day to day oversight of the President, that's the BOD's job.  And his first go around, while marred with some incidents that we heard about and thought were addressed by the BOD, turned out to be much more than we knew.  BOD should have listened more to the howler monkeys, they were right.  Kind of like advance scouts...

[Racinready300ex]

2 hours ago, Bakerjd said:

How come everyone keeps bringing up the fact the board was with Foley lock and step yet seems to forget the fact he was RE elected by the MEMBERSHIP. Wouldn't that make the membership just as culpable as the board? 

 

Two thoughts, the BOD was also elected and ultimately had the power then and will continue to have the power going forward. 

 

And the person running against him didn't have much chance I don't think. Good guy, but not well know enough and it's pretty hard to get yourself in front of members across the country to gain enough support to win. 

 

But, yeah your point is still valid. 

[MNshooter]

3 hours ago, Bakerjd said:

How come everyone keeps bringing up the fact the board was with Foley lock and step yet seems to forget the fact he was RE elected by the MEMBERSHIP. Wouldn't that make the membership just as culpable as the board? 

No. Here’s why:

1) only a small fraction of the  membership voted in the election and therefore this statement doesn’t hold up. A non-vote is not an endorsement of the elected president.
2) membership only gets a vote (literal in this case) at the election. The BOD on the other hand got to review, ask questions, and vote on all that has been perceived as good or bad by past and present presidents through recurring board meetings. 

[twodownzero]

18 hours ago, motosapiens said:

wait, wut? there must be some misunderstanding here. I am saying that when someone runs for AD, I'm going to be interested in what they are currently doing for the sport and how long they've been doing it.... their track record, so to speak...

That was supposed to be what the President was for.  Which is why we pay him a salary and expect him to manage the things that require him to be able to spend his working day managing.

 

What has happened here is that the BoD has neutered the elected President in favor of an official who works for them.  So now, instead of replacing one person, who is elected at large, to change the direction of the organization, we need to replace enough Area Directors in staggered elections until there is a sufficiently large number of them to replace the bureaucrat position they created.

 

What do you want to bet that this bureaucrat gets paid very well with our money, is someone already politically connected to the BoD, and even less accountable to the members than the previous, now disgraced, President?

[BritinUSA]

This is the core issue, we (the members) have almost no voice in USPSA 2.0

 

Any President we elect now will be part-time and have to spend 70+ days traveling to the major matches, they will need to get SIX other BOD members to agree with them before these bylaws can be corrected.

 

It is now a BUSINESS, not an ORGANIZATION, and we are not customers, we are employees because our work and effort is what is keeping this BUSINESS running.

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, twodownzero said:

What has happened here is that the BoD has neutered the elected President in favor of an official who works for them.  So now, instead of replacing one person, who is elected at large, to change the direction of the organization, we need to replace enough Area Directors in staggered elections until there is a sufficiently large number of them to replace the bureaucrat position they created.

 

the president was never able to change the direction of the organization without the consent/approval of the board. This is how it should be regardless of whether the pres and ED are the same position (as they were under foley) or separate positions (as they were previously, and now will be again). The idea is for the executive director to run the business operations that require expertise and continuity and for the president to lead the board and guide the direction of the organization.

 

It's interesting to me that many of the same people who were screaming about what they perceived as foley's abuses, bullying heavy-handedness, etc.... are now screaming about efforts to prevent a similar concentration of power in the future. I think many people just like to complain.

[MikeBurgess]

3 hours ago, motosapiens said:

 

I think many people just like to complain.

you may be onto something.

 

 

[Bakerjd]

6 hours ago, MNshooter said:

No. Here’s why:

1) only a small fraction of the  membership voted in the election and therefore this statement doesn’t hold up. A non-vote is not an endorsement of the elected president.
2) membership only gets a vote (literal in this case) at the election. The BOD on the other hand got to review, ask questions, and vote on all that has been perceived as good or bad by past and present presidents through recurring board meetings. 

A non vote is 100% an endorsement of whome ever gets elected. In essence you are saying you don't care. 

 

The membership only ever got a say at the time of the election. Much the same as our government. We ellect those people in hopes they will do what we think is the right thing. If they do not then next election they dont get reelected. 

 

 

 

[deerslayer]

1 minute ago, Bakerjd said:

A non vote is 100% an endorsement of whome ever gets elected. In essence you are saying you don't care. 

 

The membership only ever got a say at the time of the election. Much the same as our government. We ellect those people in hopes they will do what we think is the right thing. If they do not then next election they dont get reelected. 

 

 

 

I hope USPSA does not begin operating like our government.  

[RJH]

I voting for whoever gets rid of aftermarket hammers, but calls people midpack bitches on the campaign trail. I think a pres that does those 2 things will help clear the snowflakes out of the sport

[Sarge]

13 minutes ago, RJH said:

I voting for whoever gets rid of aftermarket hammers, but calls people midpack bitches on the campaign trail. I think a pres that does those 2 things will help clear the snowflakes out of the sport

Did foley ever email you repeatedly making threats to throw you out of the sport, embarrassed you for no reason? If he didn’t you have no idea what he was like.