Yea just how when they get voted in by the public the minutes say appointed as well when they first
Get the position, it technically means the board doesn’t have any objections on why they should try to over turn the decision made
By any way or means so they appoint/confirm that person
No I agree with that, but a lackie and a representative of the peoples cummalative vote to carrry out the orders of the board serve 2 differnt groups of people
So now it’s conflicting, does the bod appoint one yearly or are they voted on with the bod elections
Here is a link do when Julie was asking for volunteers
https://talk.dallasmakerspace.org/t/president-job-description/59444
Honestly if you don’t feel like explaining what’s in the link it just derails the conversation cause you have to infer what you mean to say about it
In addition here is a link where @skyspook (on behalf of the BOD) was also asking for volunteers for such positions.
That’s just saying he submit the bod your job application, that’s not a vote, it’s not like the us says hey anybody wanna run submit us your resumes
The bylaws are before you to study. Otherwise we are at an I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you situation.
6 Likes
I’ve read the link, but in a truly democratic process to represent the people, minimize the people the people vote on, and let those few(now fewer) choose anybody that could provide any opposition about topics seems likes shift towards the other type of d government when everyone is so against adding a single person who get voted in
I mean why not let the gov pick 5 speakers of the house and they’ll pick the rest would you agree thatd be a valid democratic representative system
If you read the bylaws, we are not a democratic government 
4 Likes
Where in the bylaws do you read that any officer is voted on by anyone other than the board members? Members vote on chairs, which are subject to board confirmation, and the board only. There is zero provision in the bylaws for members to vote on the officers.
1 Like
You just said it yourself, they vote on them’ I’m not
Saying circumvent the approval and confirmation process
And yea thst seems weird so we want people who are members to have control who’s in charge of their room but just not have that power with the people who lead and represent them!? Seems backwards
If we’re not we should very clearly drop the do-ocracy thing because people working for the people is I think one of the corner stones of a democratic process
headdesk
3 Likes
Is that somehow calling me ignorant! That it’s such a complex topic I’m to stupid to understand and you’ve been unable to!
I genuinely am interested in your standpoint on why not have 5 speakers of the house and they’ll pick the rest of Congress?
I didnt see anyone call you ignorant. I saw quite a few people explaining that whatever is going on in your head is not how it works here and references to the appropriate documentation(RE:BYLAWS).
I’m baffled why you keep making these parallels to civics when the model for DMS is corporate governance, which is reflected in our bylaws.
If you don’t like the model, I suggest developing an amendment proposal such as I did in 2020.
3 Likes
No you responded with headdesk, and the thing here is i never asked how is it here, I asked why isn’t it the way that makes more sense if being democratic so there’s nothing to explain to me I understand how it works, thst was never needed to explain that to me, but what there is to explain is why is it done the obvious less likely to foster democratic leadership
So our leader don’t act in the intrest of the people they represent? Because I can’t remember the last time my boss thought if my office was adiquate tempature over how big his bonus will be which would be corporate governance
Yea he doesn’t want it at 90 cause he knows I’ll be less productive and doesn’t want it 40 cause he’ll know I’ll die, but he’s definitely given no thought to is Chris comfortable, but his bonus….he’s thought about that more than he’s said my name