American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)
http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/

CoA Voting Proposal
http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=18300		 Page 2 of 3
Author:  prax [ Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Gentlemen,

Thank you all for the frank discussion of this topic. I am of the opinion that any ACWGC member in good standing should be eligible to vote in the election of another player to any office for which elections are required.

My comments are more on point to 3.3.4.2.1 (eligibility) and the comments of Lt. Gen. Miller and BG Olinsky.

Rank alone does not measure a player’s current level of commitment very well, at least not in the Army of Georgia. A full General who won’t answer email and does not play any games may have been a great Club leader 5 years ago, but he is not a candidate for Army Commander in my book. By the same token, a Major who has been with us three or four months and goes off like a bottle rocket at all the Forums all the time is no candidate either. I want to see a steady hand with a strong current interest in the hobby. A record of proven stability established by muster participation and game play over a period of at least one year should be a clearly stated qualification for top command positions. As an AC, I am much more interested in whether one of my fellow players demonstrates an energetic interest in the ACWGC hobby by staying in communication and promoting the games than I am with their rank.

Respectfully,
Author:  Deano [ Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Gentlemen:

For what it’s worth, I'd like to enter this discussion.

I agree with General Blake regarding voting for respective CoA. I am of the opinion that any ACWGC member in good standing should be eligible to vote in the election of the CoA for their own Army. The more participatory our Club Governance is, the more participation from members I think we will get.

However I do see merit in "Time in Grade" so to speak in regard to experience, education and commitment to the club.

As a Field Grade Officer I see that I can stand for election for President of the ACWGC; however I recognize my limitations and very limited experience in the Club disqualify me, at least in my own mind. Similarly, I do not feel that I personally have had "Time in Grade" to even command a Division.

I understand the desire to have the most experienced and stable officers possible Commanding our Armies, and support Rank qualifiers for CoA. "Time in Grade" if you will. But even without them I would trust the members of the Union Army to tell the relative merits regarding experience, education, commitment and leadership between General Joe Meyer and Colonel David Martin. Especially if we are each given a post on the Union Army Forum to provide information on our experience or other relevant factors.

I strongly support dedicated, Club experienced officers as CoA. In my mind, someone without "Time in Grade" (no matter how nebulus that concept may be for me to explain) has no business being CoA. The President of the Club may fall back on experience or education outside of the Club. But I do not believe the CoA can. They must have that experience and education that only comes through "Time in Grade" as an active participant in Command Activities in our Club.

Therefore, I view this idea has having merit because I believe we should foster participation in Club Governance issues in every officer in good standing. Again I believe the more participatory our Club Governance, the more participation from members I think we will get and the stronger our Club will be in the long run. But my support is for General Blake's original proposal only.

Regards,

Col. Martin
Author:  Neal Hebert [ Sun Nov 25, 2012 8:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Colonel Martin <salute>

Deano, I enter this discussion simply to address your doubts you have the "time in grade" necessary to "even command a division".

I took my first division command (Gator Alley) after roughly 4-5 months in the club, and in my opinion division command can be a rewarding experience. You do your best to establish and maintain contact with the other 4-5 officers, do your best to keep them informed and engaged, and work toward establishing a bond to the point you're in almost continuous contact.

If there are division commands available in your corps, I suggest you consider requesting one. There's only one way to learn, and your own chain of command should provide any support you need if there are questions. I'm sure even a couple of us Rebels would be more than happy to offer our advice if needed.

Highest regards,
Author:  Deano [ Sun Nov 25, 2012 9:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Gen. Hebert sir: {salute}

Thank you for your advice. It is greatly appreciated. I was unaware I could request a command.

You are among the first rank of those who make this Club the special place it is.

I also know I can take you at your word. If needed you would do your best to assist any member.

That's what this is all about after all, and you are a shining example of an Officer and a Gentleman in the ACWGC.

Warmest Personal Regards,

Col. David "Deano" Martin {salute}
Author:  Jefferson H. Davis [ Sun Nov 25, 2012 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Col Deano,

That's because Genril Hebert is a Southern man....Most of us are that way.....It's part of our culture......lol....
Author:  Neal Hebert [ Sun Nov 25, 2012 9:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Colonel Martin <salute>

Deano, that's how I got my division command. I asked for one, and the worse that can happen is they say "no". :wink:

Highest regards,
Author:  Blake [ Sun Nov 25, 2012 9:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Thanks for the continued opinions yall. Keep them coming.

John Newton's statement that the requirement should be dropped to Brigadier General to vote is something I have heard before. But it would still be subject to the same arguments now ongoing and would eventually be challenged again.

The rules to vote for a Cabinet Secretary and President are very clear - any Club member may vote regardless of rank. The CoA election is the only one in which there are special rules as to who can and cannot vote. I understand the CoA is important but I think fostering Club participation is as well. Right now the majority of members on both sides are blocked from choosing their leaders and I still feel that's wrong and unnecessary.

As David Martin said the members are intelligent enough to know who is and isn't able to hold such positions. To block them from voting because you think they may not be is insulting to a degree. If a CoA trusts people enough to let them run organizations at a rank below Lt. General than why would they also not be trusted enough to vote intelligently?


Others continue to touch upon the idea of challenging the idea of who should be allowed to run for CoA, Secretary, and/or President and the rank involved with that. This proposal has nothing to do with those issues. I believe those issues will be re-examined in the future though. But this particular proposal does not seek to change any current requirements for candidates for those positions.


Again, thanks to all those contributing.
Author:  TMiller [ Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Salutations my friends.....

I concur with Pierre's and Blake's Posts....and as I said previously.....the club is for all ..... a vote for all

Pierre... excellent post as a President

Blake....as I said before....Love ya...even though you compete against my daughter (she is K-Mart's National Pharmacist Trouble-shooter) ....
Author:  Jefferson H. Davis [ Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Tim,

Does that mean she executes Pharmacist's and tech's that screw up on "controls"? My wife works In a HEB Pharmacy....
Author:  CSAJG1136 [ Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
I agree with John. The health of the club will rest on new members staying interested. Voting is a way to encourage that interest. Nice discussion.
Author:  TMiller [ Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
Hank

I believe so.....
I know she handles issues nation wide in regards to their pharmacies....
they want her to move to Chicago but right now her and her family are
still residing in SC
Author:  pierred [ Tue Jan 01, 2013 6:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
General Blake,

Your proposal has been vetoed, by me. However I understand the concerns and your valid points that a lot of experienced members are being left out. I have made a proposal to expand the group that can vote and we are in the process of discussing it. Hopefully the result will include all the valuable experienced members in a CoA election.



Your Proposal

Quote:
In the election of a CoA all members may vote for the CoA representing their respective military group. Nominations for the CoA may be made by any regular officer subject to the restrictions in Rule 3.3.4.2.2, below.
Author:  Blake [ Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
A veto implies it was passed by the Cabinet and then vetoed by you. Is that the case?

If not then the word veto wouldn't apply and it would be a dismissal of the proposal which seems kind of odd. What's the point of members proposing things if the Cabinet can change the wording to suit them without giving credence to the original intent of the proposal? We may as well stop proposing specific things if that's going to be the case and merely propose items be "reviewed."

I am just curious is all. I know the Cabinet is reviewing the issue but I just wanted to get a little more clarification for future reference. Thanks!
Author:  pierred [ Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
No, a veto can be used at any point. I don't see the point of waiting for everyone to vote before stating it. If the cabinet wishes to overturn they can do so. However to expedite things and not be bogged down in bureaucracy which seems to be the case more and more I indicated that I would veto it. There was no expectation of an overturn since the discussions were primarily not for it. I jumped the gun a little, to speed thing up so we do not get bogged down in procedures. I am wiser now and am better prepared to get thing done. As mentioned I don't think my veto will be overturned if it is I will let you know.
Author:  pierred [ Sat Jan 05, 2013 1:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CoA Voting Proposal
The Cabinet in a majority vote has not passed the Proposal. No veto was required. However there is talk to broaden the voting requirements.
Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/