Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
AGA July 2011 minutes http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=4779 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Tue Oct 04, 2011 6:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | AGA July 2011 minutes |
I copied from a pdf, so formatting is a bit off, but here are the minutes from the July 2011 AGA board meeting. Quote: Minutes
AGA BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING Wednesday, July 6, 2011 – 8:00 PM EDT Meeting called to order by: Andrew Okun at 8:07 PM EDT Type of meeting: Regular Monthly Conference Call Attendees: Jie Li (At Large) Paul Celmer (Eastern Region) Lisa Scott (Central Region) Laura Kolb (Central Region) Andrew Okun (Western Region, Chairman) Gordon Castanza (Western Region) Allan Abramson (President) Pauline Pohl (Secretary) Absent: Chuck Robbins (Eastern Region) 1. Approval of May 22, 2011 minutes Gordon Castanza made a motion to approve the minutes of the last regular monthly Board meeting from May 22, 2011. Jie Li seconded the motion. The minutes were approved unanimously. 2. Call for additional agenda items and new business a. Andy Okun asked to discuss formation of a committee to select an Executive Vice President b. Lisa Scott asked to talk about paying someone to attract new members and do fundraising. 3. President’s Report a. Discussion item: Database Demonstration i. Allan Abramson asked the Board members to make suggestions if they want any changes made to the new database. 1 ii. Scott asked when it could be up and running and asked if it could be working in time to help with Congress registration. Abramson said he will try. b. Discussion item: Recognition for retiring volunteers i. Abramson suggested some options for recognizing Sam and Karen Zimmerman’s contributions. One is to pay their expenses to the Congress next year. The second is to offer airfare to the European Go Congress. Third is dinner at a fancy Philadelphia restaurant, and fourth is go equipment from an artisan wood shop in North Carolina. ii. For Adam Bridges, Abramson suggested a plaque along with a savings bond, an AGA membership extension, or a laptop computer loaded with all of the go software. iii. Okun said he would choose the comps to the US Go Congress or a go board and bowls for Sam and Karen Zimmerman. iv. Scott said that she would like to send Sam and Karen to the US Go Congress and an extension of Adam’s AGA membership for five years, the same number he served as Treasurer, would be appropriate for him. v. Jie Li said he thinks a tangible item like a go board would be more meaningful than a membership extension. vi. Celmer said he thinks Adam would appreciate a go board made from someone in North Carolina. Okun asked how much a custom made go board would cost and Celmer said he would have to ask the artist. Okun said he would like to do it but it would depend on the cost. vii. There was a consensus that it would be nice to send Karen and Sam to the Congress, but Okun said Chuck Robbins would have to find out if they would want that or not. If they are not interested in such a trip, a go board would be nice. viii. The consensus was that as long as the go board is affordable and available, that will be the gift for Adam. 2 If that falls through, we will offer a membership extension of five years. c. Action item: FY2012 Budget i. Abramson said he sent out his latest budget and hopes to get a vote of approval this evening. ii. Okun asked if the prior year actual numbers are updated. Abramson said they are actual end of fiscal year numbers. iii. Okun said it looks like we are budgeting slightly under where we ended up this year. iv. Abramson said the open question was whether or not to add $1000 to the Redmond Cup budget. v. Castanza said he is still having trouble accepting the casual labor PO Box and telephone line item 60102. vi. Castanza said we are paying $20 per hour for the work which may be high considering the job is mainly to ride a subway to pick up mail at a post office. vii. Abramson said the rate was set by the president and the Board several years ago and hasn’t been questioned until now. viii. Castanza said he would suggest offering the New York state minimum wage for the hours. He also noted that when he recently visited New York City, he saw discounts available. For example, if you buy a $10 ticket you get a bonus of $1.40. He wonders if available discounts are reflected in the rate we are paying for tokens. ix. Abramson said the actual amount spent on tokens (60100) last year was $112 which he thinks is reasonable. x. Abramson added that there is more to the job than simply sitting on the subway. There is also answering phone calls and letters which is higher level work than a minimum wage job. xi. The total charges are reasonable for the amount of work done in Abramson’s opinion. The budgeted amount has been cut approximately in half over the past few years. It used to be about $8000 per year and now it is about $4000 per year. 3 xii. Okun said that $20 per hour was reasonable for office work in New York, but in this age of virtual offices we should be able to organize ourselves so that we don’t have to pay someone that much to ride a subway to the post office. xiii. Scott said that a physical address is necessary for many reasons and a post office box is not good for bank accounts and other official purposes. xiv. Abramson said he has heard of a service where they go to a post office box, scan the contents and transmit it securely anywhere for a price of about $1000 per year. xv. Okun said if Chelsea Station was no longer there and we had to start from scratch what would we do? Abramson said we need an address in New York, and he would want an address not connected to any individual volunteer which would change over time. xvi. Scott said we could forward mail from the post office. Abramson said the limit on that is a year. xvii. Okun said we could use a different service that could provide both an address and the forwarding service. We could leave the Post office box as our official address, but change the website contact information to the new, lower cost option. xviii. Jie Li said he has done extensive research on virtual offices, and it can be done quickly. They are getting advanced so mail can be forwarded as often as we want with only postage as the expense. It costs about $100 per month for the address. Jie Li thinks it is the best next step. Scott agreed. Okun said yes, but not tonight. xix. Jie Li said there are companies that help with the transition. Abramson said he will look into the virtual office. Jie Li said he would forward some options to the Board and the president. xx. Abramson said there is also the question of answering the phone. Jie Li said the $100 also includes a phone number that can be forwarded as well. He will forward the information to Abramson. 4 xxi. Scott said she would like to have research done on this issue between now and the Congress so a decision might be made then. xxii. Okun asked if there were any other line items that need to be discussed. Castanza said he is not done with that like item, because the spending keeps going up. xxiii. Abramson said we started the year saying we were going to reduce costs by automating the credit card processing, but since we had webmaster problems, that transition was delayed and the costs stayed high. xxiv. Scott said it is unacceptable to go over a budget by so much without any notification. Abramson said focusing on one line item when we had others that were below budget is unfair. xxv. Okun said the budget is a goal and we try to meet the budget, but it is only a guess and we need to be somewhat flexible. xxvi. Jie Li suggested reducing the hourly rate until we get the virtual office to keep the costs down. Tournament prizes and other expenses have been cut, so why should this be different? Abramson said he predicts Mary would quit if that decision was made. Okun said if that is the expected outcome, a reduction in rate would be counterproductive in the short term. xxvii. Scott said the sooner we move to a virtual office the lower those expenses will be. There was general agreement. xxviii. Celmer made a motion to approve the budget. xxix. Kolb seconded the motion. xxx. Okun asked if there was any further discussion xxxi. Celmer said he thinks Allan did a good job of working to drive down costs and he anticipates more improvement in the future. xxxii. There was a vote of 4 in favor (Okun, Celmer, Scott, Kolb), 1 opposed (Castanza), and 1 abstention (Jie Li). The motion passed and the budget was approved. 5 4. Discussion of Castanza’s proposal a. Castanza had circulated a proposal for amendments to the by-laws. Castanza said he thinks the president is out of control, and that the Board needs to have more control over the president. b. Castanza said we need to hold the president accountable for his actions and performance. c. Castanza said his proposals also spell out the expectations of conduct the Board members will adhere to during meetings, provide for mechanisms for budget revisions and transfers, and provide clearer delineation of the job descriptions for both the president and for the treasurer. d. There needs to be accountability and specific job descriptions and periodic performance appraisals for all volunteer positions. e. Okun asked who controls our bylaws? It looks like the Assembly votes on the bylaws, so if we want to consider changes, we need to do so at the Congress. f. Okun said there’s a lot in the text Castanza wrote that is too detailed to be added to an official document. Less detail is generally better, because conditions can change and you don’t want to have to change the document each time. g. Okun said job descriptions of volunteer positions are a good idea but they don’t have to be a part of the bylaws. h. Scott said she agrees with all that Okun said about Castanza’s proposal. i. Celmer said he likes the idea of cataloging the rulings of the Board, but changing the bylaws should be discussed at the Congress. j. Jie Li said we should implement the easy ones first and the hard ones later. k. Okun said since amending the bylaws is not a Board prerogative, what would Castanza like to do about it? l. Castanza said he wouldn’t mind discussing it at the Assembly, but it may be hard for the members to read it all in time to make a decision. 6 m. Abramson said the possibility of raising the life membership rates has been brought up several years in a row and the members were always against it. n. Castanza said that rather than submitting the proposals to the Assembly for approval, the Board could just adopt them by resolution to use as an operating principle of the Board. o. Okun said he needs more time to think about what parts he is in favor of and which he is opposed to before acting. p. Scott said she would like to make changes to our policy which would probably be less formal than a resolution. q. Castanza said he would like to have action before too much longer. Okun agreed to discuss it at the next Board meeting. 5. Discussion of SAMG question a. Abramson said Thomas Hsiang has asked that the requirement to reside in the US for six months of the year be waived to allow Michael Redmond to compete for the US in the Sport Accord Mind Games. This was done for the first Mind Games, and there were protests from Koreans that Abramson would like to avoid happening again. He thinks if there is a policy it should be applied the same way to all people. b. Okun asked if when the waiver was done last time it would be automatic the next time. Abramson said it is not, because we didn’t even know if there would be another time. c. Celmer said he defers to Abramson’s judgment on this even though he respects Thomas Hsiang and Michael Redmond it seems like making an exception would cause more problems. d. Scott said it’s too political of an issue for her to have an opinion on it. e. Okun said he is not inclined to take action to overturn the policy. f. Jie Li suggested we recognize Michael Redmond by naming him the coach for the US team instead. g. Okun suggested recognizing Redmond at this year’s Go Congress in some way to thank him for all of his 7 contributions. He suggested sharing ideas by e-mail to come up with some ideas. 6. New Business a. Executive Vice President Position i. Okun said the position of EVP is described in the bylaws and the position is vacant. ii. Abramson said Chris Kirschner was in that position for a time, but it is currently vacant. iii. Okun asked if the position would normally be a training position for the president’s job and the person would normally be the next president. iv. Abramson said it can happen that way and it would be logical. v. Okun suggested forming a committee to select an Executive Vice President. Scott agreed that is a good idea. vi. Abramson said Okun and the Board should select the committee to choose the next EVP. Okun suggested having Board members on the committee and asked for volunteers. vii. Scott, Celmer, and Jie Li volunteered to be on the committee. Okun suggested asking Chuck Robbins to serve since he knows so many AGA members. viii. Okun said the volunteers will work to fill the position of EVP. b. Fundraising and Membership Proposal i. Scott said she would like to discuss a proposal to offer a fundraiser a percentage of money raised by recruiting new members. ii. Okun suggested consulting Peter Freedman, because he has experience in the area. iii. Scott asked if we can take some action at the next meeting and Okun said yes. 7. Establish time and date of next meeting The next monthly Board meeting will be at the Go Congress on August 4, 2011 at 1:30 pm PDT. 8 8. Adjourn Castanza made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Scott seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 PM EDT. |
Author: | edgy [ Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:13 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Quote: 5. Discussion of SAMG question a. Abramson said Thomas Hsiang has asked that the requirement to reside in the US for six months of the year be waived to allow Michael Redmond to compete for the US in the Sport Accord Mind Games. This was done for the first Mind Games, and there were protests from Koreans that Abramson would like to avoid happening again. He thinks if there is a policy it should be applied the same way to all people. Perhaps the policy needs to be changed to avoid absurdities such as preventing a US citizen professional Go player from representing the US in international competition. |
Author: | Javaness2 [ Thu Oct 06, 2011 11:13 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
edgy wrote: Perhaps the policy needs to be changed to avoid absurdities such as preventing a US citizen professional Go player from representing the US in international competition. Then you end up with a 'we just want to pick who we feel like' policy |
Author: | pwaldron [ Thu Oct 06, 2011 11:20 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
edgy wrote: Perhaps the policy needs to be changed to avoid absurdities such as preventing a US citizen professional Go player from representing the US in international competition. They could change it either being born in the US or being a resident naturalized citizen. As a matter of interest, though, would your opinion change if you found out that Michael Redmond doesn't consider himself to be an 'American professional'? |
Author: | jts [ Thu Oct 06, 2011 12:59 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Presumably if there is a question of waiving the requirement, he wants to compete for the US. And there seems to be precedent; in the WMSG, Rui Naiwei competed for the PRC despite playing professionaly in Korea, and Joanne Missingham competed for Australia despite playing professionally in the ROC. The national adjective is inherently ambiguous. In 1780, was Baron von Steuben an American major general? Well, certainly not, since the man was a Prussian, not an American. But was he a Prussian Major General? Well, of course not: he was a Prussian captain. Or maybe he was a Prussian major general and an American major general. Whatever. |
Author: | Redundant [ Thu Oct 06, 2011 5:17 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Javaness2 wrote: edgy wrote: Perhaps the policy needs to be changed to avoid absurdities such as preventing a US citizen professional Go player from representing the US in international competition. Then you end up with a 'we just want to pick who we feel like' policy Which, while not objective, can be fairer than any other policy if those doing the choosing are competent and fair. |
Author: | edgy [ Thu Oct 06, 2011 7:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
pwaldron wrote: edgy wrote: Perhaps the policy needs to be changed to avoid absurdities such as preventing a US citizen professional Go player from representing the US in international competition. They could change it either being born in the US or being a resident naturalized citizen. I'm not making a nativist argument. I don't think I'd draw a distinction between native-born and naturalized; a citizen is a citizen. Selecting non-citizen permanent residents is fine by me as well; in that case I guess a current residency requirement could make sense. Quote: As a matter of interest, though, would your opinion change if you found out that Michael Redmond doesn't consider himself to be an 'American professional'? Probably not. By a most ingenious paradox, I think there's no conflict between being "an American" and also "a Japanese Go professional". (Analogy: It is surely correct to call Ichiro Suzuki "an American baseball player", while he is also a native Japanese citizen and represents Japan in international competition.) Now, if a player didn't consider himself to be an "American professional" because he didn't consider himself American, that would be different; but then I wouldn't expect that he'd want to represent the US. |
Author: | Javaness2 [ Fri Oct 07, 2011 2:06 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Redundant wrote: Which, while not objective, can be fairer than any other policy if those doing the choosing are competent and fair. Scrapping the selection policy might produce the best team, I agree completely. However if you have no selection policy, or you choose to ignore the selection policy, you are inevitably going to annoy people and have accusations of conspiracy and bias thrown at you. The AGA has something of a problem there. They create a selection policy, and people complain it isn't enforced correctly. So they listen and change. Then people complain about the change. They listen, and change. Then people demand a whole new policy. They listen and change. This is why (in another thread) I wrote that the AGA needed a President who was a Dictator, but I was obviously too obscure for the forum ![]() |
Author: | Redundant [ Fri Oct 07, 2011 7:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Javaness2 wrote: Redundant wrote: Which, while not objective, can be fairer than any other policy if those doing the choosing are competent and fair. Scrapping the selection policy might produce the best team, I agree completely. However if you have no selection policy, or you choose to ignore the selection policy, you are inevitably going to annoy people and have accusations of conspiracy and bias thrown at you. I agree completely here, and would say that then whoever doing the decision should simply respond by saying that if someone disagrees, they should vote in the next AGA election for someone who will change things. |
Author: | Javaness2 [ Sat Oct 08, 2011 11:00 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Redundant wrote: Javaness2 wrote: Redundant wrote: Which, while not objective, can be fairer than any other policy if those doing the choosing are competent and fair. Scrapping the selection policy might produce the best team, I agree completely. However if you have no selection policy, or you choose to ignore the selection policy, you are inevitably going to annoy people and have accusations of conspiracy and bias thrown at you. I agree completely here, and would say that then whoever doing the decision should simply respond by saying that if someone disagrees, they should vote in the next AGA election for someone who will change things. The problem with that is it's too late, the damage is already done before the next election comes around. |
Author: | vash3g [ Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:40 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Javaness2 wrote: Redundant wrote: I agree completely here, and would say that then whoever doing the decision should simply respond by saying that if someone disagrees, they should vote in the next AGA election for someone who will change things. The problem with that is it's too late, the damage is already done before the next election comes around. The problem with voting in the aga is that you can only vote if youre a chapter for the regional board members, and personally for the at-large board member. The board casts votes and chooses a president. I do hear theyre looking for an Executive VP to start learning from the current president so they can most likely take over. |
Author: | daniel_the_smith [ Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:49 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
vash3g wrote: The problem with voting in the aga is that you can only vote if youre a chapter for the regional board members, and personally for the at-large board member.... Flip side of this: if you have a strong opinion and good reasons, and show an interest and talk to the chapter rep for your chapter, you could potentially influence more than your fair share of votes. The system is actually biased towards giving small chapters proportionally more votes. |
Author: | shapenaji [ Mon Nov 07, 2011 11:25 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Javaness2 wrote: Scrapping the selection policy might produce the best team, I agree completely. However if you have no selection policy, or you choose to ignore the selection policy, you are inevitably going to annoy people and have accusations of conspiracy and bias thrown at you. The AGA has something of a problem there. They create a selection policy, and people complain it isn't enforced correctly. So they listen and change. Then people complain about the change. They listen, and change. Then people demand a whole new policy. They listen and change. This is why (in another thread) I wrote that the AGA needed a President who was a Dictator, but I was obviously too obscure for the forum ![]() To play devil's advocate, "By fiat" is only an effective selection algorithm if we have a stake in improving our result at these tournaments. As it stands, none of these tournaments really matter enough to bind team-selection to the AGA. And who chooses? Who is qualified to create the best team? Feng Yun? Ming Jiu? If you pick Feng Yun, your team is immediately going to have an east coast bias, even if she TRIES to be objective, she has a problem of perspective. It is harder to select players you are not familiar with. Likewise with Mingjiu on the West Coast. There could also be a situation where we end up with a team based on the "potential" that they see in students. |
Author: | Yertle [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:26 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
When it rains it pours, minutes from August, September, and October. |
Author: | vash3g [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
Yertle wrote: i only noted like 3 things that are wrong, like names. |
Author: | daniel_the_smith [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:37 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
vash3g wrote: Yertle wrote: i only noted like 3 things that are wrong, like names. Care to elaborate? |
Author: | pwaldron [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 2:52 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
daniel_the_smith wrote: Care to elaborate? I picked up Don Bresler (rather than Jonathan), but I'm not going to nitpick. As of September, the Board has laid out real priorities. Let me start by handing out some kudos. It's nice to see the start of something. Item 2 on the priorities list (pro system) looks like it's still in the brainstorming stage, but what needs to happen to produce a rank certification system (item 1) or improving the AGA member experience (item 3)? Have any of these been broken down into sub-tasks yet? What needs to happen to drive these items to completion; where are the volunteers needed? |
Author: | daniel_the_smith [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
pwaldron wrote: Item 2 on the priorities list (pro system) looks like it's still in the brainstorming stage, but what needs to happen to produce a rank certification system (item 1) or improving the AGA member experience (item 3)? Have any of these been broken down into sub-tasks yet? What needs to happen to drive these items to completion; where are the volunteers needed? I haven't heard anything about rank certification. Stuff is definitely happening on the pro system. Lisa, Allan, and myself discussed improving the membership experience and gave a list of recommendations to the board, one of which was acted upon last night (hi there, I'm "Board liaison to the E-Journal", and that position will be continue to be filled even in the event of my untimely demise-- you may now look for regular updates on the board's activity in the e-journal). These three things all had, or seemed to have, one or more strong proponents when we approved them. The remaining two items are, IMO, not so clear and it will be hard to quantify progress. I'll be trying to get updates on these items on the agenda for upcoming meetings if they don't show up by themselves. |
Author: | vash3g [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:09 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
The name Greg Leffler should be Lefler. It looks like chris kirschner will attempt to finish up the rank certification stuff again. Good thing they're still "working" on this since before the Portland congress. I wonder if HKA will actually rejoin the governance committee. Also I wonder who the old codgers are still on the committee. I wonder how desperately they need new blood like the board has now. |
Author: | daniel_the_smith [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: AGA July 2011 minutes |
vash3g wrote: It looks like chris kirschner will attempt to finish up the rank certification stuff again. Good thing they're still "working" on this since before the Portland congress. Andy seemed quite adamant about actually accomplishing it. vash3g wrote: I wonder if HKA will actually rejoin the governance committee. Also I wonder who the old codgers are still on the committee. I wonder how desperately they need new blood like the board has now. We were told last night that he has agreed to do so. I get that you have reason to be cynical, and the outside view suggests that it's probably warranted... and yeah, I understand that you've probably got a really long list of legitimate shortcomings stacked up... but... I'm getting the impression that as the board improves things you'll focus on the areas it's still screwing up. That you've left team "fix the AGA" and joined team "watch it burn". And, of course, it's up to you what team you want to be on, and you've done lots for team "fix the AGA". But... that doesn't make it fun to read your comments. Please tell me I'm misreading you. |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |