X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.seds-l
Date:         Sun, 10 Jan 1993 13:52:17 EST
From:         DJKALMAN@COLOSPGS.BITNET
Subject:      CBL PART 4

SEDS PROJECTS OVER ONE YEAR OLD, cont.


4. US CONSTITUTIONAL REFORMS.  The discussion naturally flows into this.  Last
spring, there was intense debate about a SEDS International constitution,  The
side for the international debate was Lori Clampitt, while CalSEDS, MIT, and
UAH was more for keeping power here at home.

Many of the board members, myself included, agreed that an International
Constitution was an admirable goal, but thought we should concentrate on making
sure our own house was in order before attempting to undertake this.

I assumed that if we voted this way, such a self-diagnosis / concentration
would occur.  Obviously, I was wrong.  We have gotten away from our goals and
our basics.  We have not improved US SEDS at all (in fact, in my opinion, it
has gotten worse).  Instead of working together, we have instead gone off on
our own pet projects (what we each see as being best for SEDS) and not telling
anyone about this.   Flame wars have replaced discussions, even when valid
lists of points are brought up to discuss (see the IDM debate for examples).

A further problem brought on by this is that no Constitutional reforms were
enacted.  The debate stalled out at that section, and thus, no changes were
voted on, and problems that occur later in the constitution were not even
discussed.  Thus, we have no safeguards for future problems, nor any updates to
reflect the new nature of SEDS, instead of the idealized conditions that were
around when this constitution was originally written.

I proposed that we totally rewrite this constitution, using the old one as a
base, but modifying it to prevent the problems that we have seen arise.   This
would include all changes necessary for the non-profit status, clauses about
temporary board members or a lack of the whole 15 board members, revision on
voting requirements, etc.   I also propose separate BYLAWS containing exact
specifications of what each office is required to do, what powers they have,
etc., and easy means to remove members from the national board who are not
doing their jobs (that is ALL the national board, not just the officers).  The
rewrite or the bylaws should also include such information as email access,
monthly reports by chapters on their activities (either to the board or to BOTH
headquarters), provisions for moving the headquarters, etc.  Maybe one of our
new board members, who does not have an assigned task right now, would like to
undertake this task (Bill Blum, since he is not at MIT?).

Our local computer club has done this.  Normally, most changes occur in the
bylaws of responsibilities, and these only require a club vote.  The
constitution has only need change 2 times in 5 years, after which an IRS review
was required, but this is feasible.   We could require all chapters to uphold
the constitution and bylaws of SEDS, and thus have a platform for changes vital
for SEDS that wouldn't require future constitutional overhauls.


5.  SEDS INTERNATIONAL CONSTITUTION.   Unfortunately, ever since Mark
Richardson has come to UCLA, there has been little to no discussions on the
SEDS-L by UK SEDS members.  Even SEDS-Canada input has fallen off dramatically.
Is this because of our flames wars, or because of problems with the net?  Or is
this because we have degenerated from discussions to flame wars, and nothing
productive has occurred via mail messages?   Is it because now all of the US
decisions are only made via personal phone interviews with Lisa, and thus only
private discussions?   Or is because the only SEDS actions have occurred at the
tcons, and this tends to limit the discussion (and POWER!) to those who can
attend?   Whatever the reason, this must change.

Some UK chapter sent out a chapter voting form about whether or not to form a
SEDS Int., on whether or not to continue on formulating an International SEDS
Constitution (to get away from domination by pig-headed American :).  I have
heard nothing about the results of this board.  Also, there was calls for
nominations of an advisory committee to head the transition, and coordinate
activities.   Has there been an election?   I volunteered for the chapter hunt
duties (not much more work for me anyways), but I have heard nothing.

Has anyone else heard anything?   Can the UK SEDS people post something here?
Or is it a case of where the USA people are too much trouble to work with, and
it is better just to have SEDS International and SEDS US be separate bodies?
Please tell us, I am sure many of us would like to know.


6. SEDS Scholarship.   Supposedly this was just re-started this year.  I see
some major problems in how it was run this year, and here are some suggestions
as to how to improve it in the future:

A.  Choose a more specific essay topics, and one that is more different from
the essay question required for candidacy for the US Board.

B.  Clarify who is ineligible and why, and who is eligible (are candidates
running for national office but current do not hold one ineligible?  Are board
active people ineligible?).

C.  State explicitly who is the judging committee, and make sure that there are
lots of them.  CSM almost got sued the year I came there over their EDays
scholarship, because there were only two students on the judging committee, and
no school supervision.  I took over the job as scholarship chairman my junior
year, and by forming a balanced committee to review the applications, all
rumors of bias were quickly squashed (even though one of my best friends from
high school won it).   Maybe a combination of current and former board members,
alumni, and Board of Advisor members??    But, the important thing is to state
who this judging committee is.

D.  Better definition on weighting ... say 1/4 on grades (or class rank),
1/4 on past  SEDS activities, 1/4 on other activities, and 1/4 on the essay?

E.  Specify about notification, and when the payday is.  At CSM, because we had
over 400 apps. for 3 scholarships, we said in our letters that only the winners
would be notified, that they would be notified one week before EDays by phone,
and that they would receive official paperwork/notification and a certificate
saying that they had won the award at the EDays ceremony.   When the winner is
not notified about her winning, and she finds out from someone at her school who
heard talk on the L, and come December she still has not been paid ... THIS IS
SIMPLY OUTRAGEOUS!!!   It doesn't take that much more effort to do the job
right, in a professional manner.

F.  Set aside the funding for the winner ahead of time (escrow account,
maybe?).
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU