the Associate member question

[Lawrence]

how about we ask the members what they feel via a vote ,the criteria in the new constitution states

“Associate members will be entitled to attend meetings but will not be eligible to vote on any matter nor will they be eligible to be elected to the management team”

I propose we put a vote up with these terms as the proposal,no debate on the matter just a vote .
opinions please

[admin]

Re: the Associate member question

Hi

If this is posted then I can see a debate starting from certain members.It’s unto the committee to set up and agree for the best of what the WTA main objectives and how to reach them. I for one agree that we should allow associate members but give no voting or council rights.

Bryan

[Jackal]

the Associate member question

One must remember the CURRENT constitution allows for associate members already AND it allows for those associates to vote and join the Management Team.

The new constitution is designed to remove those anomalies by formally defining what are considered associate members and what they are allowed to do.

This I think benefits members whom have a desire to retain the independent status of the Association.

Of course how you sell it to the members is up to you but I think they should be aware this particular change is designed to both allow associate members but restrict their undertakings.

Best wishes

Carl

Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk

[kwatt]

Re: the Associate member question

Just, when you tell people about it, frame it right and the calls for it etc.

K.

[Allsorts]

Re: the Associate member question

If you are going to ask for a vote on it (which I don’t think you should request a vote; you would not normally vote on a security issue), then be sure to describe the full tier structure so that the reason is fully visable.

Also describe the possible flaws if the addendum where not placed into the constitution.

George

[Lawrence]

Re: the Associate member question

The way I read it is we are damned if we do and Damned if we don’t .
If we draw peoples attention to it are we making an issue where there isn’t one ?
If we don’t draw peoples attention to it and someone picks it up are they going to ask why ?
The only good thing (in a bizarre way ) is that the current constitution helps us as if someone picks it up we can say that the current constitution is not stringent enough in this area .

So we just publish the new constitution and if the associate question is raised then answer the question on its merit ,do we all agree ?

[bazza500]

Re: the Associate member question

I’m not for opening a debate on it. I say publish the new constitution and I doubt anyone will pick up on it. As Jackal says we are tightening the loophole of Associate membership anyway.

[Allsorts]

Re: the Associate member question

Security is always an upmost concern in any prospectus… All you are doing is attending to security to assure that no wrong-doing can take place.

George

[Author]

Posts