I agree that there needs to be a minimization of the influence of money and
chapter size, so that we can "maintain a level playing field." However, this
failure to get information to the membership is a good example of where
something that is theoretically the right thing to do can result in the
opposite effect - it encourages information flow through only a few limited
avenues. Hmmmmm.
For instance, I have been personally appalled at how few ARMA members at the
conference show up for the Candidates' Forum. At first, I thought this was
lack of interest, but then I remembered how constrained travel schedules
are, arrival times at conferences are often inconvenient, the directions to
the Candidates Forum may be missed, and everyone has numerous business and
professional interests competing for our time at these conferences. The
Candidates Forum is totally inadequate if it is considered to be the "prime
opportunity" for information flow regarding candidates. Even the Web Forum
is difficult to use and keep up with. In fact, one might say that to leave
the information flow at this limited level, considering the EXTREME
importance of having candidates that reflect member sentiments, is almost a
prescription for failure.
Can you imagine the ridicule that the media would heap on national
governmental candidates if the only real way you could get information on
them was to visit a forum or attend a conference?!? I am hoping that the
ARMA Board of Directors will review this issue this year and we can come up
with more solutions to this problem that are fair to the candidates,
minimize baseless rhetoric, and yet assures that the members are informed on
these issues.
John
********************************
John T. Phillips
BS, MSLS, CRM, CDIA, FAI
Information Technology Decisions
www.infotechdecisions.com
865-966-9413
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Patrick Cunningham
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 9:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ARMA Elections - Campaigning For Office
To add to Judy's points, I would tend to agree that we might be able to
loosen things up a little bit. I'd hate, however, to see a bunch of
posters and buttons show up at Conference only for the candidates that
were willing to spend money on a campaign.
I think at the root of things, we're trying to maintain a level playing
field.
The risk that a company would put money into a candidate's campaign is
probably slight among practitioners, but could be an issue if a
particular vendor or vendors decided to stack the deck. Again, the
level playing field.
Lastly, given the paucity of turn out, there is significant risk that a
large chapter (or chapters) could swing the vote with a concerted
effort to get out the vote for a candidate or bloc of candidates.
Having said that, I think there is a middle ground some place where
people can feel empowered to speak about endorsing a candidate, without
bashing any other candidate. I think that is something that would
enhance the process for all members.
Patrick Cunningham, CRM
PS: For Bill and others who are wondering, I'm still negligent on
getting the branding / tag line task force together. My fault and my
fault alone on that.
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
