I've read them over and have made a couple of choices. I don't see anyone listed I wouldn't vote for. The list of nominees is impressive and I wish all of them the best of luck.
I do like how a couple of them put in statements about where they stand on issues........ like the possible NSS office move and an opt out option for the JCKS. Maybe in the future there could be paragraph at the bottom of each blog that addresses their stand on pending issues.
Dan Sullivan Member Southern Colorado Mountain Grotto Co-chair Colorado Western Slope Grotto NSS Youth Group Regional Coordinator
The recent "update your info" mailing we got from the office asked if we wanted to opt out of JCKS. Naturally not --with a house of two scientists, even though we both disagree with the concept that JCKS has to be written in a turgid, inaccessible style. Even the AAAS, and the mag Science (gold standard for published research) writes, or at least summarizes in reasonable English these days. Science doesn't have to be supra-literate for the research to be solid-- it's often the baffle them with bs crowd who may have sketchy data, in my experience. I know most of the editing and print make ready work on JCKS is done for a small honorarium, but there is no reason why the mag couldn't be made to be intellectually accessible to at least 80% of all adult cavers, from high school dropouts to Ph.Ds.
Haven't looked at the BOG nominees yet. It's been a coons age since anyone I voted for got elected, so we'll see.