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

Re: [mythsoc] Digest Number 515

Expand Messages
  • David Lenander
    I wasn t a Steward as long as David was, but I was for quite a few years. I m voting yes. I see David s points, but I think I agree with the Council that it
    Message 1 of 2 , Feb 15, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      I wasn't a Steward as long as David was, but I was for quite a few years. I'm
      voting yes. I see David's points, but I think I agree with the Council that
      it would be a good idea to include a few more. Another possibility might be
      to look once again at a different model proposed by Diana Pavlac, many years
      ago, with even fewer Council members but restructuring things rather
      differently. We need more departmental volunteers, in my opinion, and I'd
      planned to volunteer with DGs (if Matt would have my help) but Life has
      interfered with my tentative plans, so far.

      One point of disagreement with David about facts: we have NOT sought a
      Society Publicist at any point in many years as we had one. I am not even
      clear that the position is currently vacant, but the whole time I was liaison
      to publicity on Council I was liaison to a person appointed by a previous
      Steward and confirmed/accepted by Council. I didn't receive any resignation
      and never felt it was my place to ask it. But a Council position (which we
      did once have) would be filled for a definite term. I think that we ought to
      seek such a person. After all, some people said we'd never find a Mythlore
      editor that way, but we did.

      However, I rather agree with David that Council meetings can become (or at
      least, in the past did become) an onerous burden for someone willing to do
      their "job" or discharge their departmental responsibilities.

      mythsoc@yahoogroups.com wrote:

      >
      > Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:02:26 -0800
      > From: "David S. Bratman" <dbratman@...>
      > Subject: Mythopoeic Society Bylaws Amendment
      >
      > Those of you who are members of the Society will have received your
      > directory form and ballot for the Bylaws Amendment in the mail late last
      > month. (The amendment would raise the size of the Council of Stewards, the
      > Society's governing body, from a range of 8-11 to a range of 10-13.
      > California state law dictates the width of the range of a corporate board,
      > and prohibits the board from changing that range without approval of the
      > society's members.)
      >
      > Probably most of you have sent in the ballot already - it's due the end of
      > February - but I wish to make these comments anyway.
      >
      > This former Steward (19 years of service on Council, 1980-99) is not
      > convinced by the arguments in favor given on the ballot, and would have put
      > questions and objections had I been able to attend the Business Meeting at
      > Mythcon, or even had I known the issue would be raised then.
      >
      > 1) It is hard enough to find volunteers to fill ten slots as it is. To
      > make this a minimum only increases the problem.
      >
      > 2) True, we need more volunteers to work for the Society. That doesn't
      > mean we'll get them. The argument in favor notes the urgent need for a
      > Society Publicist. I agree. But we've needed one, and been looking for
      > one, for 15 years!
      >
      > 3) Rather than increasing the number of workers with Stewardships, I would
      > have thought there were one or two Stewards who would be just as happy to
      > do their jobs while being relieved of the duty of attending Council.
      > Folding their responsibilities in under other departments would not
      > necessarily deprive their work of representation on Council. Indeed, in
      > recent years we've been moving towards a true departmental system, where
      > multiple people work together on related tasks, one of whom speaks for the
      > whole at Council. Nor is Council so isolated a body that this is unfair to
      > the people who aren't there.
      >
      > I am casting my vote "No" on this amendment.
      >
      > David Bratman
      >
      > ________________________________________________________________________
      > ________________________________________________________________________

      --

      David Lenander, Library Manager I

      University of Minnesota Bio-Medical Library Access Services

      Diehl Hall / 505 Essex SE, / Mpls., MN 55455

      Phone: work: (612)626-3375 fax: (612)626-2454 home: (651)292-8887

      e-mail: d-lena@... web-page: http://umn.edu/~d-lena/OnceUponATime.html
    • David S. Bratman
      ... That s a wish list as long as we don t have those people. We ve been lucky, and have had to do a certain amount of very active recruiting, to find the
      Message 2 of 2 , Feb 15, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        David Lenander wrote:

        >I wasn't a Steward as long as David was, but I was for quite a few years. I'm
        >voting yes. I see David's points, but I think I agree with the Council that
        >it would be a good idea to include a few more.

        That's a wish list as long as we don't have those people. We've been
        lucky, and have had to do a certain amount of very active recruiting, to
        find the ones we have, with various awkward vacancies intervening.

        >Another possibility might be
        >to look once again at a different model proposed by Diana Pavlac, many years
        >ago, with even fewer Council members but restructuring things rather
        >differently.

        This is the model I was referring to.

        >One point of disagreement with David about facts: we have NOT sought a
        >Society Publicist at any point in many years as we had one. I am not even
        >clear that the position is currently vacant, but the whole time I was liaison
        >to publicity on Council I was liaison to a person appointed by a previous
        >Steward and confirmed/accepted by Council. I didn't receive any resignation
        >and never felt it was my place to ask it. But a Council position (which we
        >did once have) would be filled for a definite term. I think that we ought to
        >seek such a person.

        I simplified to save space and to avoid anything that might be construed as
        criticism of individuals, but my point remains valid. It's one thing to
        seek a good publicist. It's another thing actually to get one. We have in
        fact, as you say, had a person appointed as publicist as a subordinate
        position. Prior to that we had publicist as a Stewardship. But we let it
        lapse because very little publicity was being issued, and appointed the
        subordinate publicist merely as a way of avoiding letting it go totally by
        the wayside.

        It was over 15 years ago, during the early 1980s, that Council began to
        address the issue of publicity by creating a position to deal with it.
        Ever since then, we have wished to capitalize on the need for publicity,
        and have never been able to do so. That was my original point, slightly
        rephrased for factual clarity.

        >After all, some people said we'd never find a Mythlore editor that way,
        but we did.

        I don't recall anyone saying that. The concern with ML was the time and
        willingness to take on the commitment, not the ability to do it. But even
        at that, things worked out much better than they might have. The current
        editor of ML is doing a fine job, but such ability is not otherwise unknown
        in the Society. A natural talent at publicity seems less frequently found
        in the same body as a fervent interest in Tolkien and Lewis. If that's not
        so, then where are such people?

        David Bratman
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.