Steve, I understand you are very concerned about missing the window on this
and losing Jenna's offer but exactly what are you requesting?
1> That we agree to incorporating in California
2> That Jenna be acclaimed as one of WAOE's financial officers (treasurer?)
What mechanism will we use to/how will we, determine "acclamation"?
Since you made the point below- "so that organizational decisions are based
on principle rather than on expediency..." I am curious how it applies to
Please don't misunderstand: I actually prefer case-by-case decision making
and synthetic logic and I _do_ get nervous when groups or individuals
promise to make dicisions based on "principles"; I would just like to be a
little clearer on how this current request for a group decision will be
handled under our present circumstances.
Thank you for your patience.
At 6:42 PM 6/13/98, Steve McCarty wrote:
>Many thanks to Jenna for her clarifications and proposals in "Re: Friday
>thoughts." It's also necessary to tie up some loose ends in the previous
>discussion of "Jenna's Answers," so here are my responses to the
>following quotations from Joe Beckmann:
>"Jenna sure shouldn't slip through our hands. California is absolutely
>fine ... California needs at least one officer as a resident, I expect,
>and hereby nominate Jenna as whatever title she wants."
>This is too flippant as the acclamation I asked from members. I could
>swear Joe is from New Yawk. Fine about the California part, but no
>scholar _wants_ to do the work of a Treasurer unless she is very
>dedicated and _wanted_, so again I'd like to <H1>call for an
>acclamation</H1> from other dedicated charter members of WAOE.
>"... new committees get created by three or more supporting a new
>listserv, whose moderator becomes chair, and whose authority comes from
>either an Executive Committee (for admin) or
>O-CREW Managing Committee (for CREWs, who only serves to make sure there
>is only moderate overlap in any committee's function)."
>Not sure what Joe means here by "moderate." Host or emcee? The present
>Constitution draft says that the President oversees the organizational
>committees while the Vice-President oversees the subject area O-CREWs.
>"If there are people who want to join a planning & development committee
>(who might have to hustle to some of those fatcat Californians and
>others), maybe you'd even draw me into such a role."
>I guess we don't have enough committees, despite what Joe has said
>before about keeping them to the minimum? Well, fine, if another
>committee is needed to channel Joe's considerable talents.
>"As long as the Bylaws have an easy means of amendment (by majority vote
>of membership, for example), none of the rest of it is particularly
>We won't have Bylaws for some time, so we'll have to rely on members'
>judgement to some extent, but it would defeat the purpose of legislation
>if it could be easily circumvented. One purpose of the Constitution and
>so forth is to set out the principles we stand for, so that
>organizational decisions are based on principle rather than on
>expediency or individual self-interest.
>In Japan you have to invite suitable people to stand for an office, or
>if they are great, beg : - o.
>Steve (blue heron) deeply bowing like Zazu in "The Lion King."
>Professor, Kagawa Junior College, Japan
EDI Office <firstname.lastname@example.org>
long distance calling:
from outside Japan use (81-3)
from inside Japan use (03)
phone 3410-4491 24-hrs (voice/auto-paging)
fax: 3410-4082 "
pocket bell: 5890-5426 8am-8pm,Mon-Fri
EDI, #202, 3-31-16 Wakabayashi,
Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, Japan
Gordon Jolley, home: 3410-3556