|
Post by Taylor on Jul 15, 2006 13:56:57 GMT -5
From the Convention 2006 BOG Meeting Agenda nssmembersforum.proboards28.com/index.cgi?board=Announcements&action=display&thread=1152988806&page=1there are two interesting motions in re to the Limited Membership category. ----------------------------------- (13) Limited Member Rea moves: Bylaw I B (14) is amended to add the following sentence: "As of the close of business on August 11, 2006, no more Limited memberships will be sold. Existing Limited Members on August 11, 2006, will be grand fathered until their membership is dropped for any reason including non-payment." Since Limited Members receive no effective communication from the NSS, each limited member on the rolls as of August 11, 2006, will be notified of this provision by e-mail or U.S. mail as appropriate. (14) Limited Member Jones moves: Bylaw I B.14 is amended to read:Bylaw I B.14 Limited members are at least seventeen years of age. These members do not receive publications, except as stated <<and may not serve on the Board of Governors or as committee chairmen >> ; but otherwise have all the privileges of Regular members. Discussion: Note: Several thoughts on why this makes sense: --Holding office should be a benefit reserved for full members of the Society. --The Society should be managed by full members -- members who receive the publications, and are committed enough to the Society to be a full member (Regular, Family Regular, Sustaining, or Life member). Associate members are not allowed to vote or serve on the Board of Governors or as committee chairmen. --Someone who cannot afford full membership will not likely have the money to attend Conventions and Board meetings, or contribute the resources, travel and phone expenses, etc, generally necessary to effectively manage a committee. --------------------------------------------
|
|
|
Post by Azurerana on Jul 16, 2006 17:45:30 GMT -5
(13) Limited Member Rea moves: Bylaw I B (14) is amended to add the following sentence: "As of the close of business on August 11, 2006, no more Limited memberships will be sold. Well that sounds like a good way to recruit more NSS membership in cave-rich, job-poor regions....NOT! There are all sorts of reasons for the Limited membership (the number of hard-caving non-readers, who just carry the NEWS from the mailbox to the trash, for one). I can't see this as anything but a step backward. I agree that financial/time considerations for serving on the BOG are onerous--they've kept me from running even though I've been asked on several occasions. Even non-wealthy regular members cannot afford to do so unless they have the leeway with job/famility responsibilities to do some creative juggling and jetsetting. I sort of see the point here, but hey, maybe it would do the NSS BOG some good to FORCE it to have one Limited member on the BOG-- so that some of the more well-to-do speleopoliticoes hear the perspective of how the rest of us live. However-- to prevent Limited members from serving as committee chairpersons is bogus. When I served as a National committee chairperson five or so years ago, receiptable expenses such as Cheryl mentions *were* reimbursable, and I was reimbursed for them. (No travel involved--just phone, postage, Internet, office supplies...) Most committee work is communication work-- takes a lot of time, but not much money in the grand scheme of things. Maybe becoming a committee chair would *entice* Limited members to convert to regular membership. After all, I know plenty of grotto members who only became NSS members to be a grotto officer, and once onboard, they stayed NSS members.
|
|
|
Post by madratdan on Jul 17, 2006 8:18:33 GMT -5
Change that to JCKS and that's where I stand. I was literally throwing it away each time it arrived. I hate being wasteful and felt I am saving the NSS postage and money, by not receiving it. I'm guessing this means that I can keep renewing my limited membership in the future. I opted for the three year plan last year, so guess I'm good to go for a few more years. Hopefully I can keep renewing in three year increments. If not, I'll gladly pay the extra to renew a year at a time. Not being "allowed" to run for an office or be a committee chair seems unfair. Why limit someone over not receiving the magazines. In fact, it makes me feel like I'm being singled out because I don't care to receive the JCKS. It's like they are going to tell me to either take the magazine or get out of the club. It also makes me not want to volunteer for anything in the future because I've chose the limited membership option. I'd much rather give my time to the society by volunteering to hold a committee position such as I do. I'd also rather take on the expences of being an officer, instead of throwing my money away on a publication that I have no desire or ability to read.
|
|
L Roebuck
Technical Support
Caving
^V^ Just a caver
Posts: 2,023
|
Post by L Roebuck on Jul 17, 2006 12:43:52 GMT -5
From the Convention 2006 BOG Meeting Agenda nssmembersforum.proboards28.com/index.cgi?board=Announcements&action=display&thread=1152988806&page=1 there are two interesting motions in re to the Limited Membership category.
----------------------------------- (13) Limited Member Rea moves: Bylaw I B (14) is amended to add the following sentence: "As of the close of business on August 11, 2006, no more Limited memberships will be sold. Existing Limited Members on August 11, 2006, will be grand fathered until their membership is dropped for any reason including non-payment." Since Limited Members receive no effective communication from the NSS, each limited member on the rolls as of August 11, 2006, will be notified of this provision by e-mail or U.S. mail as appropriate.
(14) Limited Member Jones moves: Bylaw I B.14 is amended to read:
Bylaw I B.14 Limited members are at least seventeen years of age. These members do not receive publications, except as stated <<and may not serve on the Board of Governors or as committee chairmen>> ; but otherwise have all the privileges of Regular members.
Discussion: Note: Several thoughts on why this makes sense:
--Holding office should be a benefit reserved for full members of the Society.
--The Society should be managed by full members -- members who receive the publications, and are committed enough to the Society to be a full member (Regular, Family Regular, Sustaining, or Life member). Associate members are not allowed to vote or serve on the Board of Governors or as committee chairmen.
--Someone who cannot afford full membership will not likely have the money to attend Conventions and Board meetings, or contribute the resources, travel and phone expenses, etc, generally necessary to effectively manage a committee. -------------------------------------------- Ummm ...... as I understand the NSS continues to have a problem trying to get folks to fill positions. Just think what the addition of these limitations might do.
|
|
Rock
Beginner
Rock
Posts: 57
|
Post by Rock on Jul 17, 2006 13:31:37 GMT -5
However-- to prevent Limited members from serving as committee chairpersons is bogus. 'Bogus' is a good description but it seems a bit off. Me thinks the word 'insane' fits best. This views to me like. Those people makin the motion are like " hey! Oh! we need volunteers to fill positions but what shall do we do? (lightbulb) we will just make it impossible for them to serve the position! " HELLO! wheres the logic people?
|
|
|
Post by madratdan on Jul 17, 2006 14:25:32 GMT -5
It doesn't make it impossible....................but it does make it so everyone must conform to that type of thinking in order to volunteer.
I've heard that a lot of cave divers have switched to limited membership. I wonder how this would effect them if it were to pass?
I wonder if this would include committees within a project, or if it is limited to just the committee's listed under the VP positions? Maybe I should try to E-mail Cheryl about this direct.
|
|
Brian Roebuck
Site Admin
Caver
Caving - the one activity that really brings you to your knees!
Posts: 2,732
|
Post by Brian Roebuck on Jul 17, 2006 16:39:01 GMT -5
I fail to understand why the BOG would be worried about limited members running for office in the first place. If people join the NSS this way because of lack of money they won't even consider running for national offices. Duh! And what is the problem with limited members being in responsible positions? Are they a threat to the NSS in some way? How so? The very fact they join the NSS likely means they have an interest in national level caving which is more than most people out there. They just don't have the money to spend on extras or are simply trying out membership in the society. I know of several non-cavers who join as regular NSS members because caving/ knowledge of caves is relative to their jobs. They occasionally go into caves when it serves their employer but they are not cavers. Often their employer pays their dues, purchases the 'company' cave gear for them to use on the job, etc, etc. Yet they have the right to serve as NSS officers whereas real honest to goodness cavers holding a limited membership do not have the same right! Who would you rather have to represent you as an NSS officer? Perhaps it is time to limit NSS membership to actual cavers that are intelligent enough to read, can afford to serve national offices, promise to volunteer for offices, pass a test on NSS history, are related to Floyd Collins, etc etc. Jeez. What are these people thinking? Are they afraid of change so much that paranoia is running rampant? Are there other reasons this is happening? Something doesn't smell right about this to me. I hope logic and reason prevail in the end. I have too much time and energy invested in the NSS, caving, mentoring cavers, and caves to see it all come tumbling down around us.
|
|
NZcaver
Beginner
U.S. Caver
Posts: 140
|
Post by NZcaver on Jul 17, 2006 17:20:38 GMT -5
Funny - I just posted about this subject on "that other" discussion board. I'm not, nor have ever been, a limited member - but I agree this is probably not a good move on the part of the NSS leadership. Especially considering the "rationale" used in the last paragraph. It reminded me of a previous post by Dan on that other forum, stating he would change to limited membership specifically to avoid being sent the JCKS, even though it would cost him $1 more in total to also subscribe to the NSS News. I see by this thread, he stuck to his guns. Good job, Dan! ;D
|
|
|
Post by madratdan on Jul 17, 2006 18:07:14 GMT -5
Thanks for the kind words, NZ. I guess what torks my tube about a change like this is, if it passes, the fact that I paid for a membership package, and then they change the terms of the deal when I have two years left on that membership deal. Doesn't seem real fair and I'm hoping to have time later to send off a few E-mails to the proper parties. I'm just hoping I can renew again when my time comes due. I can always serve on committes without chairing them. I'm off to meet Mikie and try to soften some more rocks up at Moby's cave.
|
|
|
Post by Azurerana on Jul 17, 2006 19:31:42 GMT -5
There are many people in my state who work their butts off for caving projects, but for the most part are just eking by financially--no trust funds, no $100,000 plus cushy jobs--they've just got caves in their back yard--and many are limited members (for a number of reasons, not all of them economic). Since the big name committee work is reimbursed for expenses (if one cares to claim it) economics isn't an issue. Limited members go away, the NSS membership goes down. Not a good thing...
Thanks for crossposting NZ... they need a little shakin' up over there, anyway...we had an outgoing NSS BOG member give us the skinny on a number of current issues s/he disagrees with--but mostly s/he disagrees with the in-group mentality on the BOG, which is why s/he left.... I've been voting for no one who has served over 3 BOG terms-- and only if I cannot find someone suitable in the 'new blood'.
|
|
|
Post by chac on Jul 17, 2006 22:17:33 GMT -5
Dan,
You wrote:
I've heard that a lot of cave divers have switched to limited membership. I wonder how this would effect them if it were to pass?
You are right, there are a lot of cave divers who opt for NSS limited membership status (to meet the CDS membership requirements). Some of this may be due to the fact that they are not interested in the News or JCKS publications, but they are interested in Underwater Speleology and discounts at the CDS store.
What is also interesting is the number of cave diving instructors for the CDS hold the limited membership. In any case, it will be interesting (or sad) to see what occurs in the CDS membership numbers should the motion pass.
Jim
|
|
|
Post by madratdan on Jul 18, 2006 8:02:47 GMT -5
Hello Jim, All might not be lost. It says chair "men". I'm guessing if you elect women or dress in drag, (this is the option I'll be going with) you should still be able to hold onto your all important chair position. ;D Maybe they will make an exception for the cave diving community.
|
|
|
Post by anakvr on Jul 18, 2006 12:08:32 GMT -5
From the Convention 2006 BOG Meeting Agenda nssmembersforum.proboards28.com/index.cgi?board=Announcements&action=display&thread=1152988806&page=1there are two interesting motions in re to the Limited Membership category. ----------------------------------- (13) Limited Member Rea moves: Bylaw I B (14) is amended to add the following sentence: "As of the close of business on August 11, 2006, no more Limited memberships will be sold. Existing Limited Members on August 11, 2006, will be grand fathered until their membership is dropped for any reason including non-payment." Since Limited Members receive no effective communication from the NSS, each limited member on the rolls as of August 11, 2006, will be notified of this provision by e-mail or U.S. mail as appropriate. (14) Limited Member Jones moves: Bylaw I B.14 is amended to read:Bylaw I B.14 Limited members are at least seventeen years of age. These members do not receive publications, except as stated <<and may not serve on the Board of Governors or as committee chairmen >> ; but otherwise have all the privileges of Regular members. Discussion: Note: Several thoughts on why this makes sense: --Holding office should be a benefit reserved for full members of the Society. --The Society should be managed by full members -- members who receive the publications, and are committed enough to the Society to be a full member (Regular, Family Regular, Sustaining, or Life member). Associate members are not allowed to vote or serve on the Board of Governors or as committee chairmen. --Someone who cannot afford full membership will not likely have the money to attend Conventions and Board meetings, or contribute the resources, travel and phone expenses, etc, generally necessary to effectively manage a committee. -------------------------------------------- Thought on this. Rea and Jones have motion to restrict but it look like they will 'RID' themselves of the entire class of membership - 'the limited member' ? May look like they paving way for goverment to control caving society. Doubt can happen - but suggest Board of Governors add another class of membership. One just for U.S. Department of the Interior National Parks Service people, Private Nature Organizations people, State Employees, and all other State, Local Government and Federal Government people who ONLY join National Speleological Society due to Job positions and requirements. (One join and all freely have cave information to all people at company or organization). ** Notice people at these jobs get 'payday' for doing cave work. Why Regular Cavers have to pay same membership dues as State, Local, Federal Government People and Private Nature Organization People whos employer gives them payday ? - Regular cavers ARE Backbone of the Caving Society.
- Regular cavers PAY FOR OWN caving gear, cave clothes, and all other expenses related to caving.
- Regular cavers DO NOT get paid by employer.
- Regular cavers DO NOT have their NSS member dues paid by employer.
- Regular cavers ARE Main Supporters of the National Speleological Society and have NO employer regulated agenda.
When thoughts of restricting or deleting 'Regular Members' from National Speleological Society membership - in end all that left is Government Run National Caving Organization.
|
|
|
Post by Azurerana on Jul 18, 2006 19:45:11 GMT -5
Dear anakvr, There already is a category for this: Institutional membership. You might be hard pressed to define when someone who is a 'professional caver' --i.e., gets paid to go in caves, is a 'real' caver or when they just do it because it is part of the job. Believe me, it's hard to tell with some of these people where the workday ends, and fun begins. I'm married to one such person-- NSS number precedes government employment. You might think it so, but there are many of these types who go to Convention, NCKMS, and caving on their own dime, and are never reimbursed by their employers, though they are required to keep current in the field.
|
|
Kelly
Beginner
Posts: 129
|
Post by Kelly on Jul 27, 2006 11:45:02 GMT -5
I just now saw this, and emailed Cheryl. Its insulting to the limited members to ass-u-me that what they can afford to pay has anything to do with their commitment to the NSS. The people I know that can afford to be regular members decided to be "limited" because they have someone else in the household that they can borrow publications from. To suggest they are not informed or care about what is going on at the NSS is just plain wrong. One other interesting point: One of the Board members told me that originally the limited membership dues was based on the deduction of the cost for the publications from the membership dues. Some Board/Officers seem to be under the impression the limited members are getting a 'free ride'? Reality is they are paying just as much as everyone else. The rest of us pay the 'extra' part that gets eaten up by production, publication, and mailing costs. -Kelly NSS Life Member
|
|
Rock
Beginner
Rock
Posts: 57
|
Post by Rock on Jul 27, 2006 18:05:54 GMT -5
I was gunna post something like this,
One can hope that before the next national speleological society bog meeting anti-psycotics will be served before the nss president calls the meeting to order.
But I thought it might be tooo harsh. I am kinda insulted by these two motions and the bog members who wrote them.
|
|
Kelly
Beginner
Posts: 129
|
Post by Kelly on Jul 28, 2006 12:36:15 GMT -5
Dawn Ryan just posted on the NSS DB that Cheryl has retracted her motion about not allowing limited members to run for the BOG or be an Officer or committee Chairman. Yeah Cheryl!!! Now if we could just get Tom to retract his wish to eliminate the limited membership...
|
|
L Roebuck
Technical Support
Caving
^V^ Just a caver
Posts: 2,023
|
Post by L Roebuck on Jul 28, 2006 14:29:12 GMT -5
Dawn Ryan just posted on the NSS DB that Cheryl has retracted her motion about not allowing limited members to run for the BOG or be an Officer or committee Chairman. Yeah Cheryl!!! Now if we could just get Tom to retract his wish to eliminate the limited membership... ATTABOY Cheryl !!!
|
|
|
Post by Sharon Faulkner on Jul 28, 2006 15:21:58 GMT -5
Wow...this is good news. Thanks for letting us know Kelly! Good for Cheryl for changing her mind on the matter!
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hood on Jul 29, 2006 8:02:31 GMT -5
For those interested, here is the actual motion that was passed at the November 4, 2000 Board of Governor's meeting.
"Taylor moved: Bylaw I.B is amended by adding subsection (14):
(14) General members are at least seventeen years of age. These members do not receive publications, except as stated; but otherwise have all the privileges of Regular members.
(a) General members receive copies of Society periodicals published no more than once per year, and such special publications or issues of periodicals as the Board of Governors may direct.
(b) Dues for General membership shall be set no lower than the amount which added to the cost of a subscription to the monthly periodical of the Society equals the dues set for Regular membership.
Barton seconded.
Barton moved to amend: insert "except holding office" after "privileges of Regular members." at the end of the second sentence.
Bussey seconded.
VOTE to amend: In favor: Halliday, Jagnow, Bussey, Barton, Jones, Stevens Opposed: Rest FAILED
VOTE on the motion: In favor: Rest Opposed: Halliday, Jones PASSED"
An attempt to restrict holding office was attempted then, but was voted down by the board.
You can find the minutes of past BOG meetings in the Business section of the NSS web page.
|
|
Kelly
Beginner
Posts: 129
|
Post by Kelly on Jul 29, 2006 19:53:32 GMT -5
From what I read on the NSS DB now, this motion to do away with the limited (General) membership seems to have originated from a brainstorming to try to gain membership. Here are some of my thoughts on this...
I've been taking many many newbies caving from work over the last 5 years in an attempt to teach our state environmental regulators to appreciate karst and caves. There have been several people over the years that have really liked caving and wanted to learn more. I used to direct them to the NSS, but with some of the bad politics that have happened lately, I almost feel like I want to keep them from seeing this side of caving. Its really important to put our best face forward, particularly to the people that creat and enforce our environmental rules/laws.
I think all of the good stuff at the NSS is still there - education benefits, club atmosphere, etc. I just think that right now the concentration is on "fixing" things that are not wrong, and not concentrating on crating new things that will attract new people. The politics is overshadowing the good stuff.
Mike (my hubby) started caving (late 1980s, early 1990s) with a group who taught him that being a member of the NSS, or worse - a grotto member - was equivelant to being a caving snob. The few of the group that were members used to have to hide their membership and never told them that they attended grotto meetings. Maybe the NSS needs to do something to present themselves as more down to earth group that everyone will feel welcome to join?
I did notice just today in the NSS members manual that my zip code 300XX is the zip with the highest number of NSS members!! Food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by madratdan on Aug 7, 2006 9:29:48 GMT -5
Wow...this is good news. Thanks for letting us know Kelly! Good for Cheryl for changing her mind on the matter! Kudos to Cheryl for changing her mind, but Tom still seeks to eliminate this membership option. My days of volunteering for anything are over, and if this membership option is eliminated, I'll just change to the family one and send them even less money. For me, it's all about not receiving the JCKS. I'll drop membership before I am forced to receive it. It's such a waist for me to keep throwing it in the trash each month.
|
|