On 11/9/13 12:55 PM, Bill Talanian wrote:
Rod,
I second your opinion about anonymous statements or sources. Why would someone lose credibility by hiding behind the cloak of anonymity. A stronger consideration would be given to someone's opinion or rationale when they are up front with everyone. Instead the source just blew their argument.
I am writing this as an individual member or SBARC, expressing my opinion.
I personally have received two anonymous communications regarding this proposal. The first was a printout of the proposed changes and a ballot form. The outer envelope had the SBARC logo and return address, but there was no cover letter identifying the sender, no statement that the proposal was ratified by th Board, and no argument in favor or against.
The second was in my opinion a reasonable argument against accepting the proposed changes as written, also anonymous, sent by email to this listserver.
If in fact the proposed Bylaws changes have not been voted on and approved by the SBARC Board, then the mailed proposed revision is far more egregious than someone anonymously stating his or her opinion.
Because the anonymous mailed document was sent in an envelope bearing the SBARC logo and return address it implies that these changes are approved and sanctioned by the SBARC Board. If in fact, as the second anonymous document states, the Board has not ratified these changes then the source of the postal mailing also blew their argument to a greater degree due to the fraudulent and unauthorized use of the SBARC logo.
A reading of the Bylaws doesn't require that revisions be sourced from the SBARC board. Presumably any voting member can propose a revision.
As a mild example, I as a voting member could propose a bylaws change requiring a dress code of pink tutus to be worn at all Board meetings.
I could mail that document out under my own name with a signature and a reason why I felt the change was justified.
I could mail it out anonymously with no return address or a drop-box address.
Or I could mail it out in an envelope with the SBARC logo and return address in an attempt to mislead the membership into thinking that the proposal was official Board policy.
In my opinion the first would be the responsible thing to do, the second somewhat crude and the third example could be considered fraudulent.
Seeing as both the change proposal and the argument against it are anonymous and the proposal contained no rationale, argument, or justification for the change, I'm a lot less willing to blindly accept it than what appears to be a well thought out rebuttal from someone who may fear repercussions for identifying himself/herself.
And, the last point is well taken. Presenting this on election night is indeed irresponsible in my opinion.
P. S. I do NOT in any case recommend such a dress code requirement. It is just an example.
-- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay@impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV