[19915] in APO-L
Re: convention review
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stephen Merrill)
Fri Jan 22 18:20:57 1999
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 18:09:55 -0500
Reply-To: Stephen Merrill <smerrill@MINT.NET>
From: Stephen Merrill <smerrill@MINT.NET>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
I do not think that requiring people to arrive at convention on the 26th is
a good idea. The time of year when we have convention is right in the midst
of multiple holidays, and taking people away from their families, when they
have already been away for the semester, is not a great idea. More often
then not, the two reasons most often mentioned for not going to convention
are "not enough money" and " I need/want to be at home with my family for
the holidays." Having the 26th as and excursion day for sightseeing and the
like is great, but starting "work" anytime before mid afternoon on the 27th
is unfair to people who want to be with their family.
Limiting the number of proposals is not a bad idea in my mind. Let the alum
and staff find undergraduate sponsors for their ideas, and the active
brothers will have to approve it in the long run anyway, so why not from the
start. Arguments regarding legislation being reported out of committee, and
using this to thin out ideas are valid. But look at the volume of
legislation which originated from just a few people this last time. It
would at least make life a lot more sane for our committee delegates, who
were likely some of the people mentioned as "dropping" from exhaustion.
Just my humble opinion
Steve Merrill
Section 94 Vice Chair
Advisor, Sigma Xi, University of Maine-Orono
-----Original Message-----
From: Francase <mfranci@EMORY.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU <APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [APO-L] convention review
>On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Richard Quodomine wrote:
>
>> > My main concern (and reason for writing this) is the concern of the
>> > actual legislative session and how long it took. From what I was told
3
>> > people had to be taken off the floor for health reasons, while many
>> > more were sent to bed because it was just too much.
>>
>> > one of the suggestions I heard was:
>> > 1. limiting the # of proposals alumni can submit while encouraging
>> > under-grads to submit more (currently that ratio is very
disproportionate)
>
>I'm really not crazy about limiting the amount of proposals which should
>come from alumni. Granted, this is an undergraduate organization, and
>undergraduates should dubmit more legislation, but Alumni that have been
>around for a while have also had the opportunity to see how proposals and
>goals change over the years, and thus they produce a lot more to change
>things, since they have been around long enough to see what does and does
>not work.
>
>>
>> > It is my firm belief that the following should be done:
>>
>> 1. Voting Delegates arrive on the 26th and committee agendas and
>> meet-and-greets get taken care of that day. Say, around 3 PM - 6 PM (just
an
>> idea time, not solid). This way, preliminary items can be taken care of.
Many
>> delegates arrive on the 26th as it is, and to me, it seems as if that
would
>> get alot of stuff out of the way early.
>>
>I like this idea. Most of us are already arriving on the 26th anyway.
>Though it would be difficult to determine what would qualify as
>"preliminary items". Maybe have the opening session that day and nothing
>more, as opposed to having the opening session with roll call and then
>afterwards going straight to opening committtees.
>
>> 2. Water be kept constantly on hand. Hotel conditions tend to be both
sterile
>> and dry. This leads to health problems, especially for students who are
>> adjusting to climate changes as well. I know the floor runners are
extremely
>> busy (did it at '92 Nationals), but filling a pitcher of water may well
be the
>> best thing we can do for our delegates.
>
>There was water on hand for all the committee meetings, as people kept
>coming aorund to fill them up. This would help a lot on the floor, too.
>I liked the whole "Adopt-a-delegate" idea, that helped a lot especially
>when we all were getting cranky around 2 AM.
>
>>
>> 3. An alternate voting delegate be pre-registered with the National
Convention
>> in case of health problems or other such difficulties. This person must
be
>> certified by Rules and Credentials as "on the list" before such time as
he or
>> she takes over. I know Rules & Credentials already subpoenaed over 100
people
>> last year during Banquet, but this alternate delegate may be the only way
to
>> keep up health. The alternate voting delegate should be used only in case
of
>> inability to perform duties of the current voting delegate, and should in
no
>> way constitute a 3rd vote. I welcome ideas and ammendments on this issue,
as
>> it seems there is no perfect solution here.
>>
>I thought we could already submit names to serve as alternate delegates.
>We almost had to use one since I got foor dpoisoning on Christmas Eve and
>almost wasn't able to come- in that case, we would have used our
>alternate. So I thought something like this was already in place.
>
>Lastly, I had a problem with Rats being as late as it was. I'm not sure
>what could be done to change the time of this, but having Rats/Ducks
>starting at 3 in the morning after being on a committee and the floor
>pretty much wore me out completely. Perhaps if it was done as part of a
>dinner break (everyone gather for 2 hours,. bring food, and listen)
>that might work better.
>
>> Respectfully submitted,
>> Richard D. Quodomine
>> '94 Voting Delegate, '98 Committee Advisor, Scouting
>>
>Michael Francis
>Delta Kappa Voting Delegate '98, Emory University
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Michael L. Francis "Life is a waste of time,
>Emory University Time is a waste of life;
>P.O. Box 21079 So get wasted all of the time
>Atlanta, GA 30322 And have the time of your life."
>(404)251-1794 -Anonymous-
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>
