Results 241 to 260 of 268
-
10-06-2011, 12:23 AM #241
Your Honor -
Let the record show that the witness was asked a DIRECT QUESTION, which he very carefully evaded, heading off into the hinterlands of discussion. Perhaps the gentleman would be so kind as to answer the question FIRST, before giving testimony on new material. I ask you again, sir:
How
Is
My
Shade-Tree
Lawyering
Coming
Along?
(Perhaps a more germane response will make it out of my keyboard in the morning...)
-
10-06-2011 12:23 AM # ADS
-
10-06-2011, 06:07 AM #242
-
10-06-2011, 07:47 AM #243
-
10-06-2011, 08:12 AM #244
I love that little comic strip...
Life is Good
-
10-06-2011, 08:26 AM #245
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- Just a few miles from Zion National Park
- Posts
- 8,456
-
10-06-2011, 08:30 AM #246If you are wondering what my wife and I are doing in my Avatar... we are laughing at all you funny looking Bogleyites!
-
10-06-2011, 09:14 AM #247
Tom, my questions of the history of the ACA were meant as, well, questions. I was trying to understand the evolution of the ACA. Some have said that Rich's version is tainted. So I asked trying to understand the venom just a little bit better to rationally discuss the "issues". I was actually going to reread all the posts to figure out just why I am so darn dumb. BUT.....
Forget all that. I have had a good nights rest, got up early and played old man basketball (a little running and a lot of sweating) and had a fresh chocolatey Dunford donut. Boy, i am ready to roll. So here goes.
Assuming arguendo (that right there makes the whole undergrad degree worth it ) that you are right. For the sake of argument, let's agree that Rich perpetrated a fraud on the community, that he lied, that he is a cheat, that he misrepresented who he was and who the ACA was to third parties (BLM, Zion, etc. whoever). Let's assume that Rich is rude and hurt everyone's feelings and you are all justified in feeling hurt and Rich needs to go. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Rich is bad, real bad, yea even the spawn of Satan! Let's assume that Rich slithers off into a hole somewhere and is never to be seen again. Let's assume that I am wrong and you are right. Let's agree to all of that for now. (Did I cover all the gripes? If not let's agree that I did that too.)
Now, what to do with the ACA. Will you give the new entity, whatever it may be (for profit, non profit, a true association, a money grubbin' corporation) a chance to succeed and earn your trust? Would you participate on an advisory board or board of directors or as a consultant?
Will you give the new person(s) a chance even if they are appointed by Rich? Will you give the new person(s) a chance if they are voted in and you don't like them?
Let's start there for now. Just to keep the discussion going and productive.Life is Good
-
10-06-2011, 09:16 AM #248
""
-
10-06-2011, 09:29 AM #249
Mmmmmmmm. Fresh chocolatey Dunford donut... Hmmm, wonder if they have those in Kanab, but not fresh... 20 minute drive...
Yes, I stand ready to serve, put energy and support with enthusiasm the new ACA, pretty much whomever the new leader/leaders are.
Since Rich has a lot of venom for me, I see little point in me being involved in the Junta, uh, I mean Transitional Board of Directors.
I would, however, not be interested in leading the charge - just too many things on my plate that I am not doing already.
While we are resurrecting things, I might re-vivify the ZCC (with a more national name), to lead the charge on access issues. I think the community is large enough now that the ZCC/CAC could be more than a one-man-show-with-supporters.
Tom
-
10-06-2011, 09:30 AM #250
-
10-06-2011, 09:37 AM #251
""
-
10-06-2011, 09:54 AM #252
I totally agree that no one individual should be in charge.... which is why I proposed a transitional BOD with at least 12 equal members made up of as large of cross section as possible.
As for baggage I know of very few experienced canyoneers that don't come with a load of baggage. The idea behind a wide and varied BOD is everyone's baggage and special interest gets deluted....
FYI: If someone with less baggage wants to also submitted my plan or something similar to it I have no issues with that. I consider the more plans submit by more people to be a good thing.
-
10-06-2011, 10:29 AM #253
Somethings wrong on the Internet- boy ain't that the truth.
I get the need for change. Just don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Ken
-
10-06-2011, 10:33 AM #254
I think you missed out on RC's strategy meeting, Ice...
A. Say you will turn the ACA over to the person or plan that gets the most votes.
B. Ask people to submit plans.
C. Lots of people submit plans.
D. One of the acolytes submits a plan called "retain Rich".
E. With lots of plans, the plan "Retain Rich" gets the most votes.
F. Rich turns the ACA over to... himself!
Jes' Sayin'...
Tom
-
10-06-2011, 10:51 AM #255
A) I was one of the first to publicly state I should not be a BOD member or leader of the possible new organization. 100% agreement. I don't believe the demolition crew is necessarily the best group to construct the new building. Especially politically. I knew that I might tarnish my name and limit my options in the future with the public approach I have taken. I will simply be happy to pay my dues and vote on occassion.
B) Don't appreciate the insult about "better things to do" but its no big deal. I'll give you a primer on me: I value the time it takes to deal with these community issues almost as much as canyoneering; I don't feel the need to go canyoneering every possible opportunity; I don't have the financial means to do so; I in particular have 2 specific, debilitating health issues preventing my ability or desire to get outside as much right now. Hope that clears up how I value and operate.
C) See Tom's or OldNo7 summary of the "its just about a name" statement or petty personality differences. Its not and they have stated my ideas better and more precisely than I have.
Enjoy getting out there and "doing it".
Phillip
-
10-06-2011, 10:58 AM #256=ratagonia;475391
While we are resurrecting things, I might re-vivify the ZCC (with a more national name), to lead the charge on access issues. I think the community is large enough now that the ZCC/CAC could be more than a one-man-show-with-supporters.
Tom
I think having a "CAC" would at a minimum be a great internet site to funnel people interested in educating themselves. I still go to the old ZCC site on occasion for that purpose.
Phillip
-
10-06-2011, 11:15 AM #257
Hey, the main reason I submitted a proposal was to get people thinking and make sure there was at least one other option on the ballot other then "Elect Rich Dictator".
If there is actually a fair and open election it will be interesting to watch it play out.... even with a fair and open election the deck is stacked heavily in Rich's favor as you know the election will be held on the ACA website. It would be appropriate for someone other then Rich to hold the keys to the ballot box.
-
10-06-2011, 11:35 AM #258
For those interested in the structure of outdoor associations I will provide links below. These two are the ones the ACA admits (historically and recently) modeling themselves after. The organizations are transparent about their governance, bylaws and meetings (provide minutes). They differ in specifics but both have tenure limits and "member" elections.
http://www.caves.org/info/
http://amga.com/about/index.php
The ACA mentions The Arizona Mountaineering Club as another model. Much harder to find information but trends can be observed in the Newsletter. The do also have a rotating Board and Officers.
http://www.amcaz.org/
Phillip
-
10-06-2011, 12:13 PM #259
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- Just a few miles from Zion National Park
- Posts
- 8,456
Well said Kip!
But sometimes an outsider is actually the best because we all tend to become biased. A paid outsider, a business man that does not canyoneer might be the solution. Someone that can see all sides and be fair to all and has no personal agenda other than build the organization.
When voting we would all vote for those we like, canyoneer with and who think like us, support us and who don't dislike us for sure! That would just make the organization again lopsided. Towns often hire outside people to run their chambers just for this reason. Many here run their own business, otherwise we probably would not have time to sit on the net all day, but it takes more than having time, knowledge and loving canyoneering to operate something that belongs to the people.
-
10-06-2011, 12:27 PM #260
Tom, I would be thrilled to see you develop this and to personally learn from & contribute to it.
Similar Threads
-
American Fork Canyon Caves
By DiscGo in forum Climbing, Caving & MountaineeringReplies: 13Last Post: 07-30-2013, 08:57 AM -
ACA - Guides - Training
By Don in forum CanyoneeringReplies: 12Last Post: 06-22-2009, 06:51 AM -
Anybody Climbed American Fork Canyon?
By tallsteve in forum Climbing, Caving & MountaineeringReplies: 3Last Post: 04-18-2008, 08:08 AM -
Guides Training Seminar Grand Canyon
By Bo_Beck in forum Boating, Rafting, Kayak and CanoeReplies: 3Last Post: 04-01-2008, 02:00 PM -
North American Brewers' Association
By Wasatch in forum General DiscussionReplies: 0Last Post: 05-11-2007, 06:05 PM
Visitors found this page by searching for:
Outdoor Forum