> when did TRA BoD start acting as if it was already changed? (i.e.;
> unilaterally changing the conduct of the organization in defiance of > existing bylaws)
>
> when was it actually changed?
>
> what process for change was observed?
>
> when exacty was a proposal made to the membership, and what were the > results?
>
> find the answers, and you will see what I mean by "seized control" >
> - iz
Iz,
I spent much time and effort debating this issue with John Cato, Ken Vosecek, and a few others who were claiming the BOD was acting improperly when chainging the bylaws. It turned into one nasty argument on compuserve, and I am not willing to go through that again, and I certainly not going to debate this issue with you, as I try mightly not to flog a dead horse.
Bottom line, the membership was given an opportunity to vote on the change in the bylaws and the voting majority accepted it. If you don't like, tough s*it.
I have no problem with TRA BOD having the ability to change the bylaws without permission from the membership. If they do something I don't like, I have the option to vote them off the board, or not renewing my membership. I am busy doing other things, like spending time with my family, runing a business, and flying rockets with with my fellow TRA Members. Judging from the your opinions and mannerisms displayed here, I am glad I have give the BOD the ability to act on the bylaws without your interference!
How come you stopped posting to TRA Listserve? Can't you take critism from your TRA bretheren?
You have chosen to publicly slander the current TRA BOD, and I hope they individually sue the crap out of you. If you had made the same acusations about me, I'd drop a fair amount of change just to drag your butt in front of a judge.
Jeff Barnes TRA #2267