Skip to Content

Correspondence to NERB

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
Young Master Smeet
Offline
Joined: 15/11/2011
Correspondence to NERB

Dear NERB,

By your leave:

Forms F are not voted on, they simply are.  The normal practice is they are submitted, and noted.  Normally, a branch would take steps to dissuade the resigning member, so the Form F isn't submitted to the EC until after the next meeting (i.e. the form is submitted at a meeting one month, and after attempts to retain the member have failed, the next meeting forwards the Form F to the EC for ratification).  If the members concerned withdraw their resignation, that takes effect, pretty much, immediately.

As to online meetings: it is apparent that the Standing Orders at the moment are not fit for purpose, they are designed for teleconference or chat-room formats, not bulletin board or email lists.

I suggest the branch adopt the following:

1) Hold one annual general meeting a year (as mandated in rule, to discuss the conference report and voting).  This could be held online, but may be better face-to-face. 

2) Allow any two members to submit a motion to the secretary for postal ballot.  I'm happy to help administer these from London, and I'm sure the HOO would pitch in.

3) Retain the forum section as an open discussion place.

moderator1
Offline
Joined: 03/11/2013

Young Master Smeet wrote:

Dear NERB,

By your leave:

Forms F are not voted on, they simply are.  The normal practice is they are submitted, and noted.  Normally, a branch would take steps to dissuade the resigning member, so the Form F isn't submitted to the EC until after the next meeting (i.e. the form is submitted at a meeting one month, and after attempts to retain the member have failed, the next meeting forwards the Form F to the EC for ratification).  If the members concerned withdraw their resignation, that takes effect, pretty much, immediately.

As to online meetings: it is apparent that the Standing Orders at the moment are not fit for purpose, they are designed for teleconference or chat-room formats, not bulletin board or email lists.

I suggest the branch adopt the following:

1) Hold one annual general meeting a year (as mandated in rule, to discuss the conference report and voting).  This could be held online, but may be better face-to-face. 

2) Allow any two members to submit a motion to the secretary for postal ballot.  I'm happy to help administer these from London, and I'm sure the HOO would pitch in.

3) Retain the forum section as an open discussion place.

Although its usual practice not to vote on a form 'F' there may arise circumstances when due to the member possibly facing charges of Action Detrimental they may well be voted on.  I agree that at the moment the SO applied to online meetings are not fit for purpose.  However, if a temporary moderation key were to be provided to the chair then the online meeting becomes more less aligned to what currently takes place at a face-to-face meeting.

jondwhite
jondwhite's picture
Offline
Joined: 19/12/2011

Agreed that a meeting should not be conducted on a forum, discussion board or mailing list.

A meeting should be conducted in real time.

This could be teleconference which can be user friendly such as Skype.

Or it could be live chat such as IRC.

moderator1
Offline
Joined: 03/11/2013

jondwhite wrote:

Agreed that a meeting should not be conducted on a forum, discussion board or mailing list.

A meeting should be conducted in real time.

This could be teleconference which can be user friendly such as Skype.

Or it could be live chat such as IRC.

Or Teamspeak.

Login or register to post comments