Re: Re:MC vs SC

[nfrank@mindspring.com]

Bob said: I do not have any clear idea what the
division of responisbility is between the two groups. Can you help me on
this issue?

Bob, 
Karen and I originally conceived the idea of the SC and MC. Here is my 
recollection. Since my memory is getting worse and worse as he years go by, I 
hope she will add or subtract where needed.  
I beleive we initially conceived the idea of the MC to prepare more people for 
running the AGA.... it will give our committee chairs as sense of being more 
invovlved and to give them exposure to the running of the overall AGA. I don't 
think we initially envisioned giving them voting rights. Essentially,  I think 
we also saw the MC as an advisory group and a stepping stone to the SC . The MC 
would provide a pool of qualified/informed people from which to select SC 
members.  This process would also ensure small changes to the way the AGA is 
currently run. I think we planned a  decision making body of 5 or 7 people 
(always an odd no.)... too many and it can loose its effectiveness or atleast 
makes it more difficult to operate. The MC can also help involve and educate 
more and more general members thru  its various subcommittees. This will create 
a better informed membership. Eventually, the selection of SC members can be 
accomplished via a  more democratic process. It is apparent!
!
 that the destinction has become blurred over the past months or year. I think 
we still see that there is generally more involvement of the members of the SC 
than the MC. That might be due to the individuals involved or their perceived 
responsibility. Now that we are starting to think about bilaws, I am not 
against rethinking the  AGA framework and making appropriate changes.
--Neil



___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.