HOW LONG?

[everetkhorton]

We keep hearing that NAFA need new blood. Lets say there is a good Director, doing a good job. How long should he/she be in office before he/she should be replaced. Suggest the number of years. You do not have to justify your answer. Just so many years. Lets not get into any discussion well if he/she is doing a great job. Look at the number of years that have been in office.

[goshawks00]

Good morning Ev!!

I do believe in term limits FOR ALL POSITIONS...
Maybe something like 4 years on then have to wait 1 year before they can hold another ( position or office.)
AND for GOD"S sake the president of the whole organization should be elected by the members of the organization.
Barry

[FredFogg]

Good morning Ev!!

I do believe in term limits FOR ALL POSITIONS...
Maybe something like 4 years on then have to wait 1 year before they can hold another ( position or office.)
AND for GOD"S sake the president of the whole organization should be elected by the members of the organization.
Barry

I agree, this not only applies to NAFA but to our government. But as far as NAFA goes, term limits are definately needed. Maybe 5 years as a NAFA director, have to be out for 2 years and then you can run again. And I too agree, the president and vice president should be voted on by the members. Time for some by-laws to be changed to make this happen.

[Tony James]

I agree, this not only applies to NAFA but to our government. But as far as NAFA goes, term limits are definately needed. Maybe 5 years as a NAFA director, have to be out for 2 years and then you can run again. And I too agree, the president and vice president should be voted on by the members. Time for some by-laws to be changed to make this happen.

Hi Fred,

for what it's worth, my advice when changing those rules would be to insert the word 'normally', as in, 'a director would normally be expected to serve no longer than.........', or else it's very easy to disqualify talent when you desperately need it.

Best wishes,

Tony.

[outhawkn]

Good morning Ev!!

I do believe in term limits FOR ALL POSITIONS...
Maybe something like 4 years on then have to wait 1 year before they can hold another ( position or office.)
AND for GOD"S sake the president of the whole organization should be elected by the members of the organization.
Barry

Exactly.......clapp

[joekoz]

Good morning Ev!!

I do believe in term limits FOR ALL POSITIONS...
Maybe something like 4 years on then have to wait 1 year before they can hold another ( position or office.)
AND for GOD"S sake the president of the whole organization should be elected by the members of the organization.
Barry


DITTO!

[goshawks00]

Ev, maybe I should also add that if elected to a position it's for 2 years, with 4 years max that being if they are re elected to a second term

[Ron Clarke]

We keep hearing that NAFA need new blood. Lets say there is a good Director, doing a good job. How long should he/she be in office before he/she should be replaced. Suggest the number of years. You do not have to justify your answer. Just so many years. Lets not get into any discussion well if he/she is doing a great job. Look at the number of years that have been in office.

If someone wants to work to change the NAFA By-Laws, by all means, go for it, but there ought to be a justification for the plan. Why would we implement an arbitary term limit without a clearly stated justification? In a small organization such as ours, the talent pool is already limited. Why narrow it further without a good reason?

If someone has the time, talent, and inclination to serve NAFA, I have no problem with that person doing so as long as he/she wants to. As long as there's an election for directors every two years, we already have a form of term limit. Case in point: we've seen an almost wholesale replacement of directors and officers in the past few years. What's the systemic problem to be solved by instituting term limits?

As long as we see directorships go uncontested in every election, I don't see the need to artificially limit someone's service to NAFA. To the contrary, the experience and institutional memories of people that have been around a while can be invaluable.

[Dirthawking]

Ron, very well said, and I have to totally agree with you. If somebody was not doing a good job, they would not get re-elected. Sometimes, the old blood is the good blood.

[jfseaman]

We keep hearing that NAFA need new blood. Lets say there is a good Director, doing a good job. How long should he/she be in office before he/she should be replaced. Suggest the number of years. You do not have to justify your answer. Just so many years. Lets not get into any discussion well if he/she is doing a great job. Look at the number of years that have been in office.

clappclapp

Learn, contribute, move on.

As for loosing experience or institutional memory, ex-directors/officers are out of office, not dead, unless term limits has a clause I don't know about.;)

Past directors/officers can still assist or advise new ones

[RyanVZ]

There was a vote a few years ago to change the bylaws to vote for president of nafa. It failed by less than ten votes and had a VERY poor turnout of members voting if I remember correctly.

[Tony James]

clappclapp

Learn, contribute, move on.

As for loosing experience or institutional memory, ex-directors/officers are out of office, not dead, unless term limits has a clause I don't know about.;)

Past directors/officers can still assist or advise new ones

Hi Fred,

it's wise to foster a spirit that values institutional memory and makes proper use of those 'in the know' while still in office, as they'll have plenty of valuable information to pass on.
If any new boy want to charge in with a stiff broom, without first learning the background to how things got to where they are, any sweeping is likely to be counter-productive --- and if past directors have 'learned, contributed, and moved on', there'll be nobody around to teach the new blood and the organisation will suffer for it.

Regards,

Tony.

[jfseaman]

Hi Fred,

it's wise to foster a spirit that values institutional memory and makes proper use of those 'in the know' while still in office, as they'll have plenty of valuable information to pass on.
If any new boy want to charge in with a stiff broom, without first learning the background to how things got to where they are, any sweeping is likely to be counter-productive --- and if past directors have 'learned, contributed, and moved on', there'll be nobody around to teach the new blood and the organisation will suffer for it.

Regards,

Tony.Hi Tony,

Sorry, I'm not buyin it. If it were true the result of the USA presidency 2 term limit would be a collapse of the government. Same for every local, regional (county) and state position.

For non-term limited government positions what we and the UK have is endless job protection. Power, whether real or perceived by the office holder corrupts.

Very similar to what goes on with the NAFA and HB boards, almost any organization for that matter. Remember, I've been to HB meetings, know Jim Chick, Nick Fox, Nick Haverman-Mart. I know what happened to Geoff Dalton.


What is important is the office not the office holder. The office holder has the mandate to do the best justice to the office she/he can. Same as we with our hawks, to do the best justice we can.

If we elect a president and vice president, then candidates for those positions can in their campaign, show how they benefited the organization with contributions of effort and management skills instead of getting the position by behind the scenes old school, old boy networking.

I agree with your 'usual' clause though. If a president/director/officer says "but I'm not done yet" on some project to improve the organization then fine, extend their term so they can get the job done.

As for new boy, charging in with a stiff broom to change the world to her/his view in one go, can't happen. The government of the organization has some semblance of a representative democracy.

If past office holders stop contributing because they are out of office then they are probably of a character that we don't what in office in the first place. To put that in terms of myself, wheter I am a director or not, I will continue to look for and do anything I can with in my scheduling and personal capabilities to assist in furthering falconry and the mission of NAFA, pre or post office holder time frame.

[Ron Clarke]

Fred, I suspect most of us stateside are unfamiliar with the UK Hawk Board, much less who Geoff Dalton is or what happened to him. Do tell!

[Tony James]

Hi Tony,

Sorry, I'm not buyin it. If it were true the result of the USA presidency 2 term limit would be a collapse of the government. Same for every local, regional (county) and state position.

For non-term limited government positions what we and the UK have is endless job protection. Power, whether real or perceived by the office holder corrupts.

Very similar to what goes on with the NAFA and HB boards, almost any organization for that matter. Remember, I've been to HB meetings, know Jim Chick, Nick Fox, Nick Haverman-Mart. I know what happened to Geoff Dalton.


What is important is the office not the office holder. The office holder has the mandate to do the best justice to the office she/he can. Same as we with our hawks, to do the best justice we can.

If we elect a president and vice president, then candidates for those positions can in their campaign, show how they benefited the organization with contributions of effort and management skills instead of getting the position by behind the scenes old school, old boy networking.

I agree with your 'usual' clause though. If a president/director/officer says "but I'm not done yet" on some project to improve the organization then fine, extend their term so they can get the job done.

As for new boy, charging in with a stiff broom to change the world to her/his view in one go, can't happen. The government of the organization has some semblance of a representative democracy.

If past office holders stop contributing because they are out of office then they are probably of a character that we don't what in office in the first place. To put that in terms of myself, wheter I am a director or not, I will continue to look for and do anything I can with in my scheduling and personal capabilities to assist in furthering falconry and the mission of NAFA, pre or post office holder time frame.

Hi Fred,

I was commenting on your words, "learn, contribute, move on", rather than suggesting any responsible person would act according to them.

Your response would concern me if I were a NAFA member deciding what to do with my vote, but as I'm not, what it reveals is of acedemic interest only.

Can I ask, do you currently serve on any NAFA committees, assisting in the furtherance of falconry or the mission of NAFA?
I suspect a history of such involvement would offer added credibility to your bid, and demonstrate an insiders grasp of current activity and the teamwork required to do the position justice.

Regards,

Tony.

[Hunter45]

The discussion on this thread has done an admirable job of describing the pros and cons of "term limits". They mirror a lot of what has been discussed in national and state politics. May I suggest another way of looking at this topic?

It has been my impression that new people don't run, or succeed in running, because of the inherent advantage any "incumbent" has. Let's level the playing field a bit AND make the process more informative.

1. ALL candidates may have their campaign materials emailed to the appropriate part of the membership (region's members or all for at large) on an ongoing basis during the campaign time frame.

2. How about a "debate" where questions are submitted in advance by the members and answers posted on a forum and have the ability to ask and have posted follow up questions to said answers?

I think Board members and Officers who are doing a good job (in members' eyes) should not be arbitrarily "term limited", but if they have become unresponsive or "imperious", the campaign process should allow a challenger a clear path to show why he/she would be the better choice.

Direct election of the NAFA president is certainly worth bringing up again for discussion and a vote.

And, perhaps most importantly, it would be appropriate if turnout in a NAFA election would total at least 75% of the eligible voters. Their own apathy is the biggest enemy any constituency faces.

[frootdog]

1. ALL candidates may have their campaign materials emailed to the appropriate part of the membership (region's members or all for at large) on an ongoing basis during the campaign time frame.


Amen. I know in the past that candidates have asked and been denied the lists that the directors have available to them giving the clear advantage to the incumbent. Maybe/hopefully that has changed with the big turnover they have had recently.

[Ron Clarke]

In the wonderful world of two-edged swords, distribution of mailing lists is one of the stickiest. Any organization is smart to guard its lists carefully, while at the same time, I can see the fairness in allowing challengers and incumbents alike access to the e-mail roster prior to an election. Just the same, I don't recall ever receiving an e-mail election appeal from a NAFA incumbent. Is that a problem? How often has that happened?

[Hunter45]

It's the challenger who needs more than his/her "biography" to campaign with. I put together, by hand from old printed member directories, my list I used to send out subsequent clarifications and/or address issues that people wanted more specifics on where I stood. I doubt I'd have won w/o putting these out.

As for the privacy of the membership list, it being available in print doesn't exactly make it "private" and you'll note that I requested the candidates have "access" to having their campaign materials sent out. The Corresponding Sec'y could handle this w/o ever divulging or distributing the actual list.

AND for those 100 or so members w/o email, a system should be in place where a candidate could provide copies and postage for the CS to send his/her materials to those people. These type of "reforms" would enhance the quality of the campaigns and give the members more information to make their voting decisions.

[Hunter45]

would be the availability of member phone numbers. Here's where the Member Directory could/should be used by those candidates who wish to "reach out and touch someone" during their campaign. I know that Ron and I both did a fair amount of that during the initial and run-off votes.

When it was all over, I think we both felt like a couple of old wild west gun slingers standing in the middle of the street with empty six shooters and a lot gunsmoke in the air. Whoever was left standing we both knew we'd given it our all. And I have to tell you, that wasn't a bad feeling!

[jfseaman]

Hi Fred,

I was commenting on your words, "learn, contribute, move on", rather than suggesting any responsible person would act according to them.

Your response would concern me if I were a NAFA member deciding what to do with my vote, but as I'm not, what it reveals is of acedemic interest only.

Can I ask, do you currently serve on any NAFA committees, assisting in the furtherance of falconry or the mission of NAFA?
I suspect a history of such involvement would offer added credibility to your bid, and demonstrate an insiders grasp of current activity and the teamwork required to do the position justice.

Regards,

Tony.Hi Tony,

I started by asking Rich every year if he needed any help with the weathering. It took a couple years but this year I helped tear down. Haven't been able to penetrate any other groups. DAL nomination was the first I was asked to do more than what I've been trying to do.

Though I have offered to help FredFogg with web stuff but he figured it out.clapp

[jfseaman]

Fred, I suspect most of us stateside are unfamiliar with the UK Hawk Board, much less who Geoff Dalton is or what happened to him. Do tell!
The Hawk Board is the UK equivalent of NAFA. Different incorporation structure but same basic goals, preserve falconry.

When the UK banned fox hunting the traditional way, a loop hole was found by the fox hunts. The loop hole allowed the hunt to continue if the dogs were used to flush for a bird of prey. Golden Eagles and European Eagle Owls were snapped up by fox hunt clubs and horrendous prices. Other members of the hunting (all hunting) community ignored or mildly complained this exploitation of the laws allowed for falconry. Geoff Dalton pointed out that neither the loop hole or the laws allowing dogs to be used to pursue and flush for trained raptors mattered. What mattered was the welfare of these Eagles and Owls at the hands of inept fox hunt clubs. Geoff's concern for the welfare of the raptors was inferred as support for the fox hunts activities (which it was not) and he was ostracized by the old boys club.

[everetkhorton]

Amen. I know in the past that candidates have asked and been denied the lists that the directors have available to them giving the clear advantage to the incumbent. Maybe/hopefully that has changed with the big turnover they have had recently.

Krys:
All members get a membership directory. But if they are new members they may not have one by the time the vote is taken. I can tell you, that about 30% of the email address are outdated. Not all members have there email address in the directory, by there choice.

[everetkhorton]

It's the challenger who needs more than his/her "biography" to campaign with. I put together, by hand from old printed member directories, my list I used to send out subsequent clarifications and/or address issues that people wanted more specifics on where I stood. I doubt I'd have won w/o putting these out.

As for the privacy of the membership list, it being available in print doesn't exactly make it "private" and you'll note that I requested the candidates have "access" to having their campaign materials sent out. The Corresponding Sec'y could handle this w/o ever divulging or distributing the actual list.

AND for those 100 or so members w/o email, a system should be in place where a candidate could provide copies and postage for the CS to send his/her materials to those people. These type of "reforms" would enhance the quality of the campaigns and give the members more information to make their voting decisions.

Greg:
You said it all in the first line of this post. "I" put together etc. NAFA puts out a bio and sends the bio to the membership. The rest should be up to the person running for the office.

[frootdog]

Krys:
All members get a membership directory. But if they are new members they may not have one by the time the vote is taken. I can tell you, that about 30% of the email address are outdated. Not all members have there email address in the directory, by there choice.

Yes I'm fully aware of this Ev, but you seem to want the status quo and that don't work for me. It simply is not fair for the current director to have access to his membership list and not extend the same courtesy to the challengers. It screams NAFA wanting to keep the good ole boy in place. Like Greg said the challenger does NOT have to have direct access to the list, but the cs could send it out. It is absolutely rediculous that a candidate must spend hours to build their own email list to send out a couple emails and the director has it handed to them on a silver platter.

[Hunter45]

Greg:
You said it all in the first line of this post. "I" put together etc. NAFA puts out a bio and sends the bio to the membership. The rest should be up to the person running for the office.

Ev, If I had not been retired, I'm not sure I could have spent the number of hours required to input the Directory info into a data base that I could use with the Merge feature of MS Word to send out my personalized campaign information. I was turned down when I specifically ASKED for NAFA DB access. Had I not had the time and technological ability to do what I did, I doubt I would be a DAL today.

I stand by my original logic that ALL candidates should have access to USE of the DB to send out their campaign messages. Fred had it right: to do otherwise, does give the incumbent an unfair advantage.

As for 30% of the NAFA email list being inaccurate, I have a simple cure for that: When NAFA gets an "email returned" notice on ANY NAFA communication, ideally it should be copied to the region's director for a phone follow up to correct it. Keeping a "clean" DB is paramount for successful communications. A further idea would be to email out a list of "bad" email addresses to ask other members to offer up corrections if they know them. Or the "bad" email addresses could be published in HCs for correction by the member or friends of the member.

[everetkhorton]

Ev, If I had not been retired, I'm not sure I could have spent the number of hours required to input the Directory info into a data base that I could use with the Merge feature of MS Word to send out my personalized campaign information. I was turned down when I specifically ASKED for NAFA DB access. Had I not had the time and technological ability to do what I did, I doubt I would be a DAL today.

I stand by my original logic that ALL candidates should have access to USE of the DB to send out their campaign messages. Fred had it right: to do otherwise, does give the incumbent an unfair advantage.

As for 30% of the NAFA email list being inaccurate, I have a simple cure for that: When NAFA gets an "email returned" notice on ANY NAFA communication, ideally it should be copied to the region's director for a phone follow up to correct it. Keeping a "clean" DB is paramount for successful communications. A further idea would be to email out a list of "bad" email addresses to ask other members to offer up corrections if they know them. Or the "bad" email addresses could be published in HCs for correction by the member or friends of the member.

Greg:
IF a person does not have the time to go over the directory, (the way it use to be) and type in the email address, do you think he/she has the time to be director. Why not make the DB available to everyone? Just print it on line under members only section of the web site. I am sure Fred has time to keep the email address up dated. <G>.

[Ron Clarke]

Ha -- At the end of the last NAFA Director At Large race, I think Greg and I were standing in the street not with empty sixguns, but with smoking telephones! I sure didn't feel like I was shooting at anyone, anyway; I hope that's not how it looked from outside. Greg and I had several long and friendly phone conversations through the summer and fall. Ours was a civil contest, indeed. Among other things, Greg had a longer and more consistent record of attendance at NAFA Meets, I suspect he started earlier and worked harder developing his e-mail directory, and he used that directory extensively. To what extent any one thing made the difference is impossible to say. When an election comes down to a handful of votes, any single variable could claim to be the deciding factor. But remember, there was no incumbent in our race. We started on equal footing. That takes me back to my earlier question:


I don't recall ever receiving an e-mail election appeal from a NAFA incumbent. Is that a problem? How often has that happened?

[Ron Clarke]

The Hawk Board is the UK equivalent of NAFA. Different incorporation structure but same basic goals, preserve falconry.

When the UK banned fox hunting the traditional way, a loop hole was found by the fox hunts. The loop hole allowed the hunt to continue if the dogs were used to flush for a bird of prey. Golden Eagles and European Eagle Owls were snapped up by fox hunt clubs and horrendous prices. Other members of the hunting (all hunting) community ignored or mildly complained this exploitation of the laws allowed for falconry. Geoff Dalton pointed out that neither the loop hole or the laws allowing dogs to be used to pursue and flush for trained raptors mattered. What mattered was the welfare of these Eagles and Owls at the hands of inept fox hunt clubs. Geoff's concern for the welfare of the raptors was inferred as support for the fox hunts activities (which it was not) and he was ostracized by the old boys club.

Thanks, Fred. Once again, we are reminded powerful mendacity is not limited to Tennessee Williams plays.

[Eagle Owl]

Just the same, I don't recall ever receiving an e-mail election appeal from a NAFA incumbent. Is that a problem? How often has that happened?

Ron, it has happened before. I can't comment on other directorates, but it has happened in the Central directorate.

[Tony James]

The Hawk Board is the UK equivalent of NAFA. Different incorporation structure but same basic goals, preserve falconry.

When the UK banned fox hunting the traditional way, a loop hole was found by the fox hunts. The loop hole allowed the hunt to continue if the dogs were used to flush for a bird of prey. Golden Eagles and European Eagle Owls were snapped up by fox hunt clubs and horrendous prices. Other members of the hunting (all hunting) community ignored or mildly complained this exploitation of the laws allowed for falconry. Geoff Dalton pointed out that neither the loop hole or the laws allowing dogs to be used to pursue and flush for trained raptors mattered. What mattered was the welfare of these Eagles and Owls at the hands of inept fox hunt clubs. Geoff's concern for the welfare of the raptors was inferred as support for the fox hunts activities (which it was not) and he was ostracized by the old boys club.

Hi Fred,

perhaps you need to expand on what appears currently to be a wholly prejudiced and inaccurate statement?
You made the point elsewhere that you picked your weapon according to the arena (or some such expression), and intimated that a forum demands a less considered response than a face to face meeting for example. I would suggest, if your intention is to represent US falconers, it is better to maintain a considered approach based in fact, and to avoid saying things, even on a forum, that might embarrass NAFA.
Any representative of falconry should remember to leave aside any willingness to peddle rumour or inuendo, or to rabble rouse in support of personal prejudices while serving others.

Regards,

Tony.

[Ron Clarke]

Ron, it has happened before. I can't comment on other directorates, but it has happened in the Central directorate.

Thanks, Brandi. What was the result in those past instances?

[Eagle Owl]

Thanks, Brandi. What was the result in those past instances?

Incumbent won.

[frootdog]

Ron, it has happened before. I can't comment on other directorates, but it has happened in the Central directorate.

I can attest that it has happened (actually the director in question used list to give support to a candidate that was running and that candidate won), and would like to further add that the director in question NEVER once used the email list before he used it to bid for re-election and did not use it for anything after getting elected either.

[Eagle Owl]

Incumbent won.

I have to amend my post. It was in 2007 and the outgoing director, Ben Ohlander, sent an e-mail out to the directorate, first one ever, to endorse Lance Christianson for Central Director. Lance won the election.

[Lowachi]

I can attest that it has happened, and would like to further add that the director in question NEVER once used the email list before he used it to bid for re-election and did not use it for anything after getting elected either.

Gee, just who could that have been.................;)

I've got to say, I've never rec'd so much from my director as I have this one, privately or as part of the directorate, or so much from NAFA period as the last couple years.

No ones ever on the NAFA forum, and for members not on here, there is very little opportunity to 'examine' the candidates except the bios sent by the CS---especially for those that may not know them by reputation, like new members. If enough interest was shown, a town meeting could be arranged I suppose of NAFA's site, sorta like is happening here.

[Hunter45]

As you can all see from the input here, Ron and I had the pleasure of having a truly civilized and respectful campaign battle for the DAL post last year. We were, are, and remain friends who care passionately about the welfare of falconry and its birds.

To boil all of this discussion down to its essence, I'd like to see the NAFA elections process provide for a plug and play version for communicating with the membership. It wouldn't be hard to do and would result, I think, in a higher percentage of participation by the membership - something I think we all would agree would be a good thing.

We have mighty fine folks running for open spots on the Board this time. Review their qualifications and ask questions to help you make an informed decision on how to cast your vote. Or, as the title of this post says, don't forget to look past the metaphors and similes to what is truly being said or intended. Sometimes what we write isn't as clear to the reader as it was to the writer. Don't hesitate to ask for clarification if you have doubts or questions.

Anyone else itchy for the molt to finish and the hunting to begin? I go in tomorrow to see if my "halo" device comes off. Then it's to the gym to get my body back in shape from all the laying around during my healing process. The doctors said my falconry hobby no doubt contributed to the fitness I needed to survive this ordeal.

I met a guy in the radiology waiting room last week who had to wear his "halo" device for TWO years from a horrible accident he had at 17. He was familiar with the usual outcome of my type of injury and was surprised I had survived or wasn't paralyzed. The net? I'm grateful for every day I have left, desire to make them "count" for something, and am trying to be more patient and understanding than I have ever been. Feel free to smack me up the side of the head if you see me being otherwise.

[Flatwater Falconer]

Amen. I know in the past that candidates have asked and been denied the lists that the directors have available to them giving the clear advantage to the incumbent. Maybe/hopefully that has changed with the big turnover they have had recently.


There is no 'list' to hand anyone. There is NO list 'available' to directors. EVERYONE has access to the member roster and is absolutely free to develop their own list to use to campaign or to contact constituents.

Each director, who takes the time, has developed their OWN list. No one hands them anything. Only the Chairman of the Board (president) and maybe the membership secretary have the entire deal at their fingertips.

[Saluqi]

You are an inspiration Greg, thank you.

I guess I ought to weigh in on the term limits question since I'm in the running for mtn director.

If I were elected to this position and the issue of term limits came up for a vote, I would vote against term limits. My reasons being that there are far too few people who are willing to volunteer their time and effort to do the multiple jobs required of them as NAFA officers, and if someone is doing a good job at representing their directorate, or all of the directorates in the case of the DAL, then I think they should be allowed to continue to serve. I operate on the assumption, maybe a naive assumption, that all directors are acting to benefit their constituents and falconry as a whole, and are not self serving in any way, shape, or form, and that directors are communicating with their directorate concerning decisions and their voting record - transparency is paramount.

In the case where a director becomes entrenched and whose actions are no longer transparent to the directorate, I again believe (naively?) that members of the directorate will step up and challenge the director publicly, in a forum such as this, or wage a campaign to replace that director.

The issue of incumbents having easy access to the email addresses of the directorate could be easily overcome if the non-incumbent requested that the secretary, or other NAFA official, send the group an email for them. That seems like an easy work around to me.

[Flatwater Falconer]

I might add that these sorts of statements such as the one quoted above are easy to type in to these forum reply slots. But, if inaccurate, are quite difficult to erase from one's memory. Please try to forget the quote as it is inaccurate.

Again, I say, IF any incumbents have a list it is THEIR own list.

Any and ALL candidates are FREE to develop and use the member roster to contact falconers in their voting area. In fact I would encourage all to do just that.

[Flatwater Falconer]

Paul wrote: "The issue of incumbents having easy access to the email addresses of the directorate could be easily overcome if the non-incumbent requested that the secretary, or other NAFA official, send the group an email for them. That seems like an easy work around to me."

See how this goes? Now the idea is gaining momentum and we all are so ready to believe that this mysterious LIST gets handed around.




IT DOESN'T
THERE IS NO LIST
PEOPLE MAKE THEIR OWN LISTS

Please forget it was ever mentioned.

[goshawks00]

[QUOTE=everetkhorton;134197]We keep hearing that NAFA need new blood. Lets say there is a good Director, doing a good job. How long should he/she be in office before he/she should be replaced.

Hi Greg,
Glad to hear you are recovering, just today, since surgery I have been able to walk w/o assistance.

How's about rather than "boiling down this discussion", Let's all answer the original question that Ev ask... It is a good question and deserves a direct answer. Which is How Long........

Now I am not saying the rest of this "stuff', in this thread isn't, hasn't been entertaining, and maybe even useful. In fact it should have it's own thread. Maybe called "But he said---"

Barry

[Saluqi]

Paul wrote: "The issue of incumbents having easy access to the email addresses of the directorate could be easily overcome if the non-incumbent requested that the secretary, or other NAFA official, send the group an email for them. That seems like an easy work around to me."

See how this goes? Now the idea is gaining momentum and we all are so ready to believe that this mysterious LIST gets handed around.




IT DOESN'T
THERE IS NO LIST
PEOPLE MAKE THEIR OWN LISTS

Please forget it was ever mentioned.


Okay, sorry Donna, no list. Your post slipped in before I posted mine, my mistake. That said, I don't think it would be too difficult for Pete Rodas to query his database and make lists for the directors, and it would save a huge amount of wasted time for the directors.

[Flatwater Falconer]

Okay, sorry Donna, no list. Your post slipped in before I posted mine, my mistake. That said, I don't think it would be too difficult for Pete Rodas to query his database and make lists for the directors, and it would save a huge amount of wasted time for the directors.

That is true it would save a vast amount of time. I wouldn't exactly call it wasted time, however. Putting together a contact list serves to familiarize candidates with each and every person in their directorate. This is valuable knowledge (in my opinion anyway).

All candidates and directors do have a level field in that they all have access to the EXACT same data base - that is the member roster. If one wants to walk the extra mile and phone or email constituents or voters then they are free to go for it. And again I would certainly encourage as much contact with voters as you can provide.

[Saluqi]

[QUOTE=everetkhorton;134197]We keep hearing that NAFA need new blood. Lets say there is a good Director, doing a good job. How long should he/she be in office before he/she should be replaced.

Hi Greg,
Glad to hear you are recovering, just today, since surgery I have been able to walk w/o assistance.

How's about rather than "boiling down this discussion", Let's all answer the original question that Ev ask... It is a good question and deserves a direct answer. Which is How Long........

Now I am not saying the rest of this "stuff', in this thread isn't, hasn't been entertaining, and maybe even useful. In fact it should have it's own thread. Maybe called "But he said---"

Barry

Okay, a number? Ten years, most will burnout after 6 years.

[Flatwater Falconer]

Paul wrote:

"Okay, a number? Ten years, most will burnout after 6 years."

I would second both those numbers and the sentiment too. ;)

[Lowachi]

[QUOTE=goshawks00;134469]

Okay, a number? Ten years, most will burnout after 6 years.

Not predicting your fate already are you?;)

I would guess you are not too far from truth though. You'd have to be into S&M to want to do more than 5 terms. If certain work remains undone, I'm sure there are committees that would benefit from such experience.

So there's my .02 worth

[Ron Clarke]

If someone were doing a good job for ten years and wanted to serve another term, we'd be lucky to have such a person and I would vote for him/her.

[goshawkr]

We keep hearing that NAFA need new blood. Lets say there is a good Director, doing a good job. How long should he/she be in office before he/she should be replaced. Suggest the number of years. You do not have to justify your answer. Just so many years. Lets not get into any discussion well if he/she is doing a great job. Look at the number of years that have been in office.

IF there were no corruption or inherint unfairness tipping the balance against the challenger in the process coloring the outcome of elections, there should be NO limits. As long as someone is pleaseing the members, they should be able to re-run.

However, I am convinced that at present neither of those cases are absolutely true with NAFA at present, although its certainly getting better.

Term limits are an interesting stop gap for actually fixing the unfairness of an election process - at least the rats will get kicked out eventually. The problem is, so will the "saints" that are doing a flawless job.

[goshawkr]

The discussion on this thread has done an admirable job of describing the pros and cons of "term limits". They mirror a lot of what has been discussed in national and state politics. May I suggest another way of looking at this topic?

It has been my impression that new people don't run, or succeed in running, because of the inherent advantage any "incumbent" has. Let's level the playing field a bit AND make the process more informative.

1. ALL candidates may have their campaign materials emailed to the appropriate part of the membership (region's members or all for at large) on an ongoing basis during the campaign time frame.

2. How about a "debate" where questions are submitted in advance by the members and answers posted on a forum and have the ability to ask and have posted follow up questions to said answers?

I think Board members and Officers who are doing a good job (in members' eyes) should not be arbitrarily "term limited", but if they have become unresponsive or "imperious", the campaign process should allow a challenger a clear path to show why he/she would be the better choice.

Direct election of the NAFA president is certainly worth bringing up again for discussion and a vote.

And, perhaps most importantly, it would be appropriate if turnout in a NAFA election would total at least 75% of the eligible voters. Their own apathy is the biggest enemy any constituency faces.

Greg,

Those are some fantastic ideas.

[Flatwater Falconer]

Tony wrote in post 31 above: "Any representative of falconry should remember to leave aside any willingness to peddle rumour or inuendo, or to rabble rouse in support of personal prejudices while serving others."

This ought to become the creed for North America . . . :D

[Lowachi]

I may have missed this, as I'm doing multiple tasks and trying to follow this thread at the same time ( Yes Krys, your design too). I may have missed it.

If a director's tour of duty is over( at whatever legnth), and no one steps up, doesn't that leave the position to be filled by Board appointment? That I'm sure isn't going to go over well.
For whatever reasons, there are often those running unopposed. If this is due to member satisfaction, well and good. I think a certain amount of apathy has had something to do with it as well, a trend I gratfully see changing.
Greg & Geoff have definitely some valid points that I think will bring added participation if they get implemented. But until said time that there are multiple candidates running for open positions, I'm not sure that limiting the commited, hard working individual is in the best interest just yet.

Hopefully I've gotten this across properly. I'm having a bit of trouble finding the right words....so fire away

[Ron Clarke]

.

If a director's tour of duty is over (at whatever length), and no one steps up, doesn't that leave the position to be filled by Board appointment?

From NAFA's By-Laws, Article II, Section 5 (d):

In the event vacancies in the Board of Directors occur in any manner other than by expiration of term of office, then the remaining members of the Board, by majority vote, shall fill the vacancy temporarily, by appointment from the eligible Regular Membership, provided that such temporary appointment shall continue only until the next regularly scheduled election at which time the Directorship shall be filled by normal process, either to the unexpired portion of the term or to a new term, as appropriate.

[jfseaman]

Wow Tony:eek:

Basically it seems like you are calling me a liar. Cool.

I think the rest of the discussion of the HB, Fox Hunt ban and the HB's position on the use of raptors to circumvent the ban, should be moved to another thread or perhaps another forum.

All the best
Fred


Hi Fred,

perhaps you need to expand on what appears currently to be a wholly prejudiced and inaccurate statement?
You made the point elsewhere that you picked your weapon according to the arena (or some such expression), and intimated that a forum demands a less considered response than a face to face meeting for example. I would suggest, if your intention is to represent US falconers, it is better to maintain a considered approach based in fact, and to avoid saying things, even on a forum, that might embarrass NAFA.
Any representative of falconry should remember to leave aside any willingness to peddle rumour or inuendo, or to rabble rouse in support of personal prejudices while serving others.

Regards,

Tony.

[Tony James]

Wow Tony:eek:

Basically it seems like you are calling me a liar. Cool.

I think the rest of the discussion of the HB, Fox Hunt ban and the HB's position on the use of raptors to circumvent the ban, should be moved to another thread or perhaps another forum.

All the best
Fred

Hi Fred,

that's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that you reported the situation inaccurately.
I have no real wish to discuss that subject, because nothing positive can come of it's public airing. I expressed my views at the time to those involved, who no doubt would admit that things did not pan out as they might have wished. Sometimes, despite people's best efforts, they get it wrong.

Regards,

Tony.

[jfseaman]

Hi Fred,

that's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that you reported the situation inaccurately.
I have no real wish to discuss that subject, because nothing positive can come of it's public airing. I expressed my views at the time to those involved, who no doubt would admit that things did not pan out as they might have wished. Sometimes, despite people's best efforts, they get it wrong.

Regards,

Tony.
Ahh, you ARE that Tony James. I had never asked because I figured it would come out in the end.

I shortened the story for the American market. Inaccurate? Please correct me in a PM if you like.

All the best
Fred

[Tony James]

Ahh, you ARE that Tony James. I had never asked because I figured it would come out in the end.

I shortened the story for the American market. Inaccurate? Please correct me in a PM if you like.

All the best
Fred

Hi Fred,

I don't know of any other falconers with that name, so I'm guessing I'm your man.
And please, stop with the inuendos, as you really have no idea of what it is you're trying to insinuate.
I really would suggest, given that you've put your name forward for a position that demands positive rather than negative actions, that you concentrate on what you can offer yourself, rather than what you object to in others. NAFA deserves that.

Regards,

Tony.

[Tony James]

If someone wants to work to change the NAFA By-Laws, by all means, go for it, but there ought to be a justification for the plan. Why would we implement an arbitary term limit without a clearly stated justification? In a small organization such as ours, the talent pool is already limited. Why narrow it further without a good reason?

If someone has the time, talent, and inclination to serve NAFA, I have no problem with that person doing so as long as he/she wants to. As long as there's an election for directors every two years, we already have a form of term limit. Case in point: we've seen an almost wholesale replacement of directors and officers in the past few years. What's the systemic problem to be solved by instituting term limits?

As long as we see directorships go uncontested in every election, I don't see the need to artificially limit someone's service to NAFA. To the contrary, the experience and institutional memories of people that have been around a while can be invaluable.

Hi Ron,

that's a well considered stance on the issue in my opinion.
Although it's possible for a long term incumbent to overstay their welcome, it's certainly counterproductive to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Best wishes,

Tony.

[jfseaman]

Hi Fred,

I don't know of any other falconers with that name, so I'm guessing I'm your man.
And please, stop with the inuendos, as you really have no idea of what it is you're trying to insinuate.
I really would suggest, given that you've put your name forward for a position that demands positive rather than negative actions, that you concentrate on what you can offer yourself, rather than what you object to in others. NAFA deserves that.

Regards,

Tony.
What innuendo?

I think you are reading to much into my posts.

[Tony James]

What innuendo?

I think you are reading to much into my posts.

Hi Fred,

let's accept that to be the case, and apologise to Ev for the distraction.

Regards,

Tony.

[jfseaman]

Hi Fred,

let's accept that to be the case, and apologise to Ev for the distraction.

Regards,

Tony.
No problem what so ever.

Oh, and I haven't received your narrative on my inaccuracies. Please forward that or I will consider lack of response a retraction.

[Tony James]

No problem what so ever.

Oh, and I haven't received your narrative on my inaccuracies. Please forward that or I will consider lack of response a retraction.

Heaven help NAFA Fred frus)

[jfseaman]

Heaven help NAFA Fred frus)
Thank you Tony, that's the point.