I wasn't going to say anything, but now that you mention it.... I gave both individuals a chance to respond, one was kind enough to answer, and the other must not be checking the forum very often. Gosh, I wonder whom I will vote for. I will have to check out the members list to see how often Mr. Schneider posts if at all. I would hope a current or potential leader of the organization would be checking this wonderful forum to get a sense of what members are interested in and talking about.
There is no excuse for the silence. Esp. since the candidates were given a dedicated part of the forum.
What makes you so sure the candidates were given this link? Some may have stumbled upon this section just to check their statements that the Club posted. Others may not have, yet. Some may have seen this announced in News From National since they're chapter officers. Some may not. Some may not have even even received their January Roundel yet. I know I haven't gotten mine. You blokes seem to have odd criteria for picking your board members!
You mean the link to the main bmwcca.org page where the entire Candidate section is displayed so prominently? I would hope they have the link. Regarding the section, this is mentioned in the CCA board meeting minutes several times (presumably, candidates for national office read the minutes) in addition to its front page prominence.
Jonathan, It's pretty clear you have an attachment to this website. Good on you. Some might call it a vested interest. Obviously many members just don't frequent this portal. Some can't even get past the login procedure. I think you're both being a little quick on the trigger. You may want to consider what is really important to look for in someone to serve on the Club board of directors. I'm not endorsing either candidate or saying anything disparaging about either. I think maybe you both should rethink the approach you've taken here. The Club has had enough trouble simply launching a functioning website. Don't base board qualifications simply on who bothers to come back here and see how it's not-working today! I assume even you, Jonathan, would find that a bit short-sighted.
Care to explain? Sounds almost like an accusation. I wouldn't make my final selection based on this but the Web site is a good part of the future of the Club which indeed will be online. If potential board members can't be bothered to participate in the section specifically dedicated to them, it does make one wonder.
Why do you keep hammering that point? These candidates didn't ask for the space. It was simply the Club's solution so they wouldn't have to allow links to other sites within the campaign statements. The candidates didn't set up this section, and the traffic is obviously bordering on non-existent right now. The Club posted the statements, not the candidates. Seems like you and I are the only ones here. Just how far in the future is that future? Perhaps it says more about your perception of what the Club is all about when you say "the Web site is a good part of the future of the Club which indeed will be online." [sic] No one denies the importance of the Web in the world today. But as a litmus test for BMW CCA board candidates? How well has the current board or Club management done with our Web presence to-date? Without our chapters and those who devote their time to the chapters, the Club would be just like any other web site, except it would just cost more to read. We've proven that anyone can operate a web site. And that no amount of money will drag people to it. But our members join because our chapters offer what no website can. How about a hand for those who actually do something for the Club? Let's hear it for the BMW CCA Chapters!
Membership has been declining somewhat. The Club authorized virtual chapters recently to stem the tide. Tens of thousands of people are active participants in online forums so the Club needs to have a far more viable online presence (and yes, it´s working on that). We are going off topic but...
But to defend a selection position, I'd like a board member to be versed in internet access. Do they need to be punching code? Ummm, no. I think a bunch of us live and breath email and internet access. [Joke alert] If they cannot handle a simple forum how the heck will they handle iDrive? Hey, Satch could answer that........ [/Joke alert]
There's your vested interest! I see your first solution was to lock the thread. Glad you had the sense not to show that side. Virtual chapters have the potential to ruin "real" chapters. The Board tilted the playing field using rhetoric in stating the by-law change to suit their agenda. Membership has been declining in anything having to do with discretionary income. Perhaps the Club got too large and lost the enthusiast base that formed and carried it for forty years? There are some who believe a Club of 10,000 active members is much more healthy than 65,000 magazine readers or web junkies. There is another world out there beyond the Internet, iDrive, and connectivity. Explore it sometime. Sorry. This is about as kind as I get when I see people trying to ruin the Club for their own narrow purposes. Now that we know your position as a moderator, I feel you should either not comment on any specific candidate, or stop posting in the election threads completely.
A bunch? How many are on this forum? I'm only asking that you keep in mind what is really important for managing the Club. Just because a candidate hasn't found this forum shouldn't cause him or her to be lambasted by tripe and innuendo. Again, many haven't even received their Roundel yet to know this forum exists, and we know few members visit this site on a regular basis. And since the Club decided not to allow website or email links in the candidates' statements, we have no way to contact them other than this obscure arrangement on which you're placing such dire import. Give it a rest.
It doesn't disappoint me. On the contrary; it confirms those vested interests referred to earlier. At least try to be fair when you're taking a stand on one candidate's qualifications over another. That's all I'm asking.
Did you ever stop to consider that I moved this out of a specific candidate´s sub forum for reasons of fairness? The candidate in the sub forum became secondary, excuse me, tertiary, to the conversation.
I'm saying the board stated the bylaw amendment in such a way that encouraged a vote "for" rather than "against". They also did not offer as cogent an argument for the "against" side as they did for the "for", and purposely left the mechanics of incorporating "virtual" chapters into the CCA structure so vague as to leave many important questions unanswered. And I see this purposed behavior in people like you disparaging a candidate who has devoted a large portion of his volunteer time over many years to promoting and working for the Club simply because he has yet to respond to your election forum. You act like he's avoiding the questions instead of being unaware they're being asked. That's not fair. What do we have here? A total of maybe five people who have actually posted in this forum? I just think you're being unfair, biased, and taking advantage of your moderator status in an attempt to influence the election results.
But Jonathan, you were the first to post in the candidate's thread with disparaging commentary. You! Are you incapable of seeing the duplicity in what you're saying? And remember, your first response was to LOCK it!
If you consider an observation, "two months and no reply," disparaging, then I truly do not know what to say. It was an accurate and neutral observation.
How convenient for you to move your own posts and re-write history. You also posted this in the candidate's sub-forum before I said Word One: So, what is this? A contest to see who will give up first? You're wrong. You abused your moderator standing by posting rhetorical comments in an election forum. In a candidate's sub-forum, to be exact. Why not admit it, apologize, and play fair for the next month?
My postman hadn't finished reading the January issue, so I wasn't worried about a late arrival. I appreciate BMWCCA1's POV in that ability for a cadidate to use the forum as not necessarily important criteria. I only stumbled on to the thread by clicking "unread posts." Of note, in the SCCA, some BoD members aren't as savvy, and as a matter of policy, many of the sub boards members do not take into account what is posted on a few forums (SCCA hosted and not). But a few board members actively participate to a positive result.
