Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

11164RE: [Gauge0] Votes at the AGM

Expand Messages
  • Ian Kirk
    Aug 22, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Jim,

      I first raised this on the floor of the AGM six or seven years ago . Everyone agreed but nothing was done although I think one year some effort was made as I remember writing a blurb about Sandy Gorski when he got his order of merit.Seems to have faded out again now though. I would think that it would be easy enough to do as candidates for the Guild "honours" must have been nominated by someone who presumably said why they were putting them forward. This should contain enough detail to give the members some idea of why they should confirm (or not?) the nomination.

      Similarly I think that even where there is only one candidate for Board positions we, the members, should be given some details of the skills or talents etc. which the individual brings to the post before being asked to vote for them. I notice that the proposer and seconder are not shown. I think that this at least should have been done.

      best wishes,


      To: Gauge0@yahoogroups.com
      From: jim.snowdon@...
      Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 10:41:54 +0100
      Subject: Re: [Gauge0] Votes at the AGM


      I, for one, did take your plea to heart and send in my proxy votes.

      One thing I do not like, at least in its present form, is being asked to vote on vice-presidents and orders of merit, in particular, for people without any information as to why they should be considered at all. What have they done for the scale to merit such appointment?

      Equally, I feel that it would be a step forward if, when the nominations are put forward to the membership, they were accompanied by brief details of who each person is. It has become normal practice in many other institutions and goes some way to avoiding the old guard voting for their brethren; I suspect that there are a good many in the Guild, particularly those who have not been life-long members with low 4-digit membership numbers, who have little if any idea who these people are.



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 3 messages in this topic