NWFlyer 2 #26 July 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteCan there be a write-in candidate for both National Director and Regional Director positions, or just Regional Director? Both. Mike Mullins won as a write-in back in 2000(?). Judy So it looks like the national director candidates are presented as a slate of candidates - is this the case? Or do voters select each candidate individually and/or write in individual candidates until they have selected 8 individuals? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #27 July 19, 2006 You can vote for up to 8 National Directors. You could also (not sure if there is room on the ballot) write-in 8 people for National Director. You don't have to vote for 8, especially if you have a favorite or 2 and you don't want to dilute your vote. You can only vote for 1 Regional or write-in 1 regional director for your region only. Many ballots have been voided because of lack of signature. The signature box has been on the top of the ballot in the past. I believe they have tried the bottom, but they have been getting more valid ballots with the signature box on top. Judy (I hope I didn't confuse you)Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #28 July 19, 2006 QuoteI am a week-end jumper and have filed an intent to run for Mid-Atlantic Director. I can understand why more people don't file. I wish you success in obtaining signatures and during the election. QuoteThe petition process as spelled out in the Governance Manual is not as difficult as the USPA and the Election Committee implement it. They stack the odds against week-end jumpers in favor of a DZO. Example: A DZO has access to the USPA member database and I do not. They will tell me nothing about membership status of those who have signed the petition. It is important when gathering signatures to know whether the signatures are indeed valid, in region signatures. They are trying to keep me in the dark as much as possible. RD candidates actually collected enough signatures before the USPA DB was available. I did it myself back in the 80's sometime. Remember that the Gov. Man says that the member has to be a member on June 1, 2006. That means that members joining for the first time after June 1 are not considered valid signatures. It also means that someone who is a member on June 1 and then lets his membership expire after June 30 is a valid signature. I know it is strange. The one who's signature is not valid can actually vote for you and the one who's signature is valid won't be able to vote for you. Don't blame me - I didn't make the rules. The USPA DB does not say whether a member was a member on June 1. So it would not help you that much anyway. Remember to collect about 20% more signatures than required. This protects you from the invalid or out of region signatures. A quick way to test for 'in-region' is to ask someone what their zip code is. Then cross check that for your region's zip code list. You don't need any DB for that. QuoteThere are things that can be done without a proxy to make the system easier. I am surprised the Committee has not already looked into these problems. They seem quite oblivious when contacted. Proxies are only needed to change things pertaining to the size, composition and election of the USPA BOD. QuoteThe DZOs and members have been fantastic as I travel around the Region, but USPA has just put up hurdles. I soooooo want to be on the Nomination and Election Committee !!!!! Well, the hurdles are the same for everyone. I wish we did not have the signature thing. USPA has tried to do away with it, but it requires 10% of the membership voicing an opinion on it and a majority to change it. QuoteConcerning time and expense: The travel to drop zones is VERY expensive, but it is what I do anyway. It takes a lot of time to do the job as spelled out in the Governance Manual. Most Regional Directors do a poor job at "making a visible presence throughout the region". I wouldn't even consider it if I were not retired. Good on you. We need more RDs like you. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EDYDO 0 #29 July 19, 2006 Thanks for the input. I enjoy and learn from your posts. Most Board members won't post !!! Quote RD candidates actually collected enough signatures before the USPA DB was available. I did it myself back in the 80's sometime Yes, it can be done, you did it. See below for my real point on this subject. Quote A quick way to test for 'in-region' is to ask someone what their zip code is. Then cross check that for your region's zip code list. You don't need any DB for that. I just wouldn't waste my time on that idea because it doesn't tell you whether they are members or not. I did try that to determine whether Washington, DC was in my Region or not and it was confusing. It looks split !!! I still don't know. Quote Well, the hurdles are the same for everyone. I wish we did not have the signature thing. USPA has tried to do away with it, but it requires 10% of the membership voicing an opinion on it and a majority to change it. My point gets missed here a lot. It doesn't matter that the playing field is level. (It isn't, because the database is available to some and not others. We just disagree on its value.) The point is that people will not even attempt to run because it is too difficult. We have to deal with things that can be changed to lessen the problem. If the secrecy were lifted, it would be so much easier and others might offer. That is just one thing that could be done !!! With all of this said, I am opposed to complete elimination of the petitions. Thanks for your posts on this and many other subjects. They are appreciated. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #30 July 19, 2006 QuoteThanks for the input. I enjoy and learn from your posts. Most Board members won't post !!! That's their problem. ;) Quote Quote A quick way to test for 'in-region' is to ask someone what their zip code is. Then cross check that for your region's zip code list. You don't need any DB for that. I just wouldn't waste my time on that idea because it doesn't tell you whether they are members or not. I did try that to determine whether Washington, DC was in my Region or not and it was confusing. It looks split !!! I still don't know. Just look at the list of zip codes for your region. For you it's 201, 220-246, 270-299 Look at the states that are split: CA, NV, TX, ID, FL Do you really think that map can tell you what region someone is in? It's the zip codes that are important. That is what it is based on. If you want to know if someone is a member, just ask to see their USPA card. Of course, if you are at a GM dz, they have to be a USPA member (in theory anyway). Ask a person what their zip code is. If you asked me and I said 92546, you'd know right away that my signature would not count as valid for you. QuoteQuote Well, the hurdles are the same for everyone. I wish we did not have the signature thing. USPA has tried to do away with it, but it requires 10% of the membership voicing an opinion on it and a majority to change it. My point gets missed here a lot. It doesn't matter that the playing field is level. (It isn't, because the database is available to some and not others. We just disagree on its value.) The point is that people will not even attempt to run because it is too difficult. We have to deal with things that can be changed to lessen the problem. If the secrecy were lifted, it would be so much easier and others might offer. That is just one thing that could be done !!! With all of this said, I am opposed to complete elimination of the petitions. Thanks for your posts on this and many other subjects. They are appreciated. Ed The value of the DB can work against you. During the last election a RD candidate checked his sigs from members in it. He counted up the required sigs. But, his count did not account for the 'be a member as of June 1' rule. The DB does not tell you that. The DB check he did gave him a false positive and led him to believe he had enough sigs. That's why you should get +20% or more sigs than actually required. The thing you should keep in mind is that you can change things easier if you are on the BOD. And to get on the BOD you have to jump thru hoops. None of those hoops will change once an election has started. They are fixed rules for this election. The secrecy that you allude to is that no one validates the signatures until after the Monday following Labor Day. No one knows if you have valid signatures until after that date. BTW from your page at http://home.earthlink.net/~uspaelection/ you say: "No opposition has ever been able to get on the ballot in the Mid-Atlantic Region (until now). For proof and to see the problems with the system, click the link below.. http://www.parachutehistory.com/skydive/uspa/elections/eleccandidates.html" This is not correct. The incumbent for most of those years was Gene Paul Thacker. No one in their right mind would think that they could defeat Gene Paul. It wasn't that no one could get on the ballot, it was that no one thought they could beat Gene Paul and did not run. Then there was the pass-off to Tony. Tony got on the ballot by collecting sigs. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EDYDO 0 #31 July 19, 2006 Very helpful information. Thanks. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mustard 0 #32 July 20, 2006 Quote In Reply To Thanks for the input. I enjoy and learn from your posts. Most Board members won't post !!! That's their problem. ;) Yup. It *is* my problem. I read DZ.com regularly, and have paid my dues to be a contributor (being a premier). But posting is a real two-edged sword when you are a "public figure." Jan knows I am not running again. Once I have become a regular jumper again, I'll post a lot more. (I wonder if there will be a backlash for being a former member of the BOD, I guess I'll find out.) Jan has a much stronger constitution than I do. She lets people yell at her and doesn't get assailed by self-doubt, as I do. I have been attacked because of actions and stances I've taken, and there have been situations where nothing I did would have been OK, somebody would be mad at me. This is a volunteer position that is taken on by most people because of a real desire to serve. It's politics, though, which takes on the inevitable taint of special interests, whether or not you are a DZO in a particular region, or if you simply work at one or more DZs. Many times I've peered out from my bunker at the conversations taking place here and have wanted to chime in but have resisted, since I'm usually opinionated in what I want to say... Plus these forums are not the most friendly of venues for even the most mild-mannered folks. I'm appalled sometimes at the (to me) unwarranted attacks and quail inwardly. *** DJan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EDYDO 0 #33 July 20, 2006 I understand. I believe many Incidents are not reported because some posts are out of line and the potential poster doesn't want to deal with it. I have seen a couple of incidents that I didn't report here for that reason. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyberdyber 0 #34 July 21, 2006 The answer to your question is very simple and I am going to be blunt about my answer. Cause up-jumpers are slack ass, selfish fuckers that rarely want to give more back to the sport than they take. DZO's do the thankless job of providing high quality facilities for little profit and major headaches compared to other fields of endeavour. So why wouldn't they be the ones to take on the extra responsibility to help shape the sport? Plus, most jumpers aren't in the sport long enough to A.) know enough people to get elected, and B.) have the qualifications to make major decisions affecting skydiving. I know several people that would make great BOD members but to do so would hurt them "politically" in their social groups. It would take personal sacrifice and would require them to spend out of pocket with no possibility of fun or return. That definitely is not for most people. http://www.skydiveatlanta.com http://www.musiccityskydiving.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 4 #35 July 24, 2006 QuoteThe conflict of interest rules also bar any Board member from contributing to the discussion or voting on any issue that has an impact on their bottom line. Those rules are regularly exercised at every meeting. I would be hard pressed to come up with any issue discussed by the BofD that would not have an impact on the "bottom line" of DZO Board Members. QuoteThat's their problem. ;) No, its the jumpers problem when their reprehensive would pass on such a readily avail vial means of communicating with their constituency.My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #36 July 24, 2006 Just a note - neither of the quotes Sparky was replying to were actually mine; though I do appreciate him furthering the discussion on this topic, I don't want to take credit for what ccq and MakeItHappen had to say about their experiences on the BoD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #37 July 24, 2006 QuoteNo, its the jumpers problem when their reprehensive would pass on such a readily avail vial means of communicating with their constituency. Contrary to popular belief, not all BOD have access to computers all day long or even at night. There are a few that hardly ever turn on a computer. If they don't answer an e-mail, try calling. jBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
