You want us to close the thread you started because people don’t approve of your plan? That sounds like stifling dissent which isn’t our job.
Additionally, I see no reason to split the topic as the posts I’ve seen have been critical of the plan posted in your minutes or defending it. All on topic.
There is one post I’d like to hide because I think it’s crass, but being crass isn’t against the rules, so as far as I’m concerned it stays.
Wow I ask a moderator for help and instead you join in the punches and put words in my mouth. Thats not being very excellent. Take a look at the guidelines you volunteered to uphold.
None of this fits what you are saying and she was within her guidelines to moderate this way. She isnt harassing you. If you have any issues with the moderators you need to take it up with the board. Moving on.
I appreciate the effort and time you and the committee have put in but I disapprove of the direction. I think several others that have posted in this thread have the same sentiment. I suppose this is all moot because the board is unlikely to fund the items outlined in the meeting minutes. It would be more productive in my opinion to come up with a different plan and pitch that. Be wrong early and often. It saves a lot of time.
Bigger picture rant beginning. Committee meetings are largely pointless and voting on everything is largely pointless. It leads to mediocre outcomes that take way too long to reach. The space needs to undo the committee leadership model clusterfuck that we have now. The lack of people willing to volunteer to be a chairperson is alarming. It’s not a coincidence and it’s not too late to change.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
What else could you mean by ‘join in the punches’?
Yeah I don’t see any room for interpretation here…
I mean you asked this:
There hasn’t been any attacks here; criticism is not an attack.
I foresee an outcome here that Op won’t like. We already have a rule about members not contacting public authorities… Soon we’ll have a rule on who can and cannot apply for grants and how you’ll put your membership at risk for doing so.
Grants have conditions and we can’t have a member - chair or not - put DMS on the hook for the conditions.
I thought we already had that.
We do. Every grant proposal has to get board approval before submission.
The rule you’re thinking of is contacting governemnt officials or government agencies or behalf of or representing that you are acting on behalf of DMS.
No… I’m not referring to approval before submission, I’m referring to NO CONTACT with regards to grants outside of pre-approved DMS folks or you’ll risk your membership. Just like with the city officials.
When did the Board approve your Container Store grant application?
