Directors' reports

[Jim Webster]

...... no directors have responded to my previous post?

Are the directors required to answer, or even read, forum posts?


Further more the calling notice for the council meeting says

Can we please request that anyone wanting to raise anything for the meeting, do so to Andy by the 8th.

[Derek Howie]

...... no directors have responded to my previous post?

Are the directors required to answer, or even read, forum posts?

Are you suggesting that directors are not obliged to communicate with members?

The directors are obliged to adhere to the constitution, and the accounts have not been made available in line with the constitution.

There was a commitment made on the forum that the accounts would be made available before today and it seems a reasonable way of asking the question.

The forum is an official forum of CS and it would be good practice for all CS directors to use it to communicate with members. Communication with members could be improved and one of the better ways to do it would be by use of the forum. All members can then have access to the answer. Surely open communication is better than little or no communication?

Further more the calling notice for the council meeting says

Can we please request that anyone wanting to raise anything for the meeting, do so to Andy by the 8th.

I'm not sure what your point is and why you think it's unreasonable for a member to expect an answer on such an important issue. Are you suggesting that the only way for a member to ask about the accounts is to have it raised at Council?

[Jim Webster]

Are you suggesting that directors are not obliged to communicate with members?

NO

The forum is an official forum of CS and it would be good practice for all CS directors to use it to communicate with members.

If the directors wish to communicate with the members then they normally do so on the formal website pages, rather than bury things in a Forum that not everybody reads. What is, in your opinion, good practice is not necessarily a view shared by everyone although it does have a degree of sensibility about it. But it is an individual viewpoint.

There was a commitment made on the forum that the accounts would be made available before today and it seems a reasonable way of asking the question.

This was commented on at the council meeting - Guess you will need to wait for the minutes

I'm not sure what your point is and why you think it's unreasonable for a member to expect an answer on such an important issue.
Are you suggesting that the only way for a member to ask about the accounts is to have it raised at Council?

Point 1 NO it is not unreasonable for a member to expect an answer on ANY matter raised. What I am saying that there is no formal requirement for Directors to respond to forum posts. The forum is a discussion board, not a vehicle for official communications.

Point 2 Am I suggesting ....? No, what I simply said was that the calling notice for the Council meeting offered a way for a formal question to be asked and replied to - thereby allowing both the question and the reply to be added to the minutes.


Anyway that's me off on a trip **== now - Thanksgiving in California calls - Turkey dinner and all

[Derek Howie]

The forum is an official forum of CS and it would be good practice for all CS directors to use it to communicate with members.

If the directors wish to communicate with the members then they normally do so on the formal website pages, rather than bury things in a Forum that not everybody reads. What is, in your opinion, good practice is not necessarily a view shared by everyone although it does have a degree of sensibility about it. But it is an individual viewpoint.

So how do you suggest members ask questions?

Anyway who are these people who think that use of the forum to allow communication between directors and members is not good practice?

There was a commitment made on the forum that the accounts would be made available before today and it seems a reasonable way of asking the question.

This was commented on at the council meeting - Guess you will need to wait for the minutes

LOL. So you know and the rest of us don't? Hey, no reason to share it with mere mortals.

I'm not sure what your point is and why you think it's unreasonable for a member to expect an answer on such an important issue.
Are you suggesting that the only way for a member to ask about the accounts is to have it raised at Council?

Point 1 NO it is not unreasonable for a member to expect an answer on ANY matter raised

So what was the point in your original post (other than just to have a go at me)?

Point 2 Am I suggesting ....? No, what I simply said was that the calling notice for the Council meeting offered a way for a formal question to be asked and replied to - thereby allowing both the question and the reply to be added to the minutes.

But not everybody reads the minutes. :p

[Phil Thomas]

Derek,

on another thread on the 5th of October I posted


It is not my intention to summarise all the agm proceedings here but briefly…….
The meeting was chaired by Steve Mannion senior. The question of the absent accounts for 2013 to 2014 arose. The finance director stated that lack of time has prevented them being ready for the agm. Steve Mannion appeared unhappy with the situation and went as far as suggesting that they be prepared asap and distributed to those who attended the agm. This idea was not formally adopted – but I don’t recall any dissenting voices from any members present.

No answers appeared on the notice from any directors. I accept Jim's view that there did not need to be. However I do not accept Jim's implied suggestion that it is necessary to have a question poised at the Council meeting in order to have the constitution followed.

The real situation is worse than that. The will of the agm is not being followed.

Here is a question for Hamish Glen the president of Chess Scotland which I do not expect to be answered on the notice board. What is the point of rewriting the constitution when you and your team do not comply with the current constitution?

[Jim Webster]

However I do not accept Jim's implied suggestion that it is necessary to have a question poised at the Council meeting in order to have the constitution followed.

I did not imply such a thing.

I simply said that if there is a pressing need for a question to be raised to the directors, and a council meeting is impending, an alternative solution is available which is formally answered and recorded in minutes.

Derek quite rightly points out that not everybody reads minutes of proceedings, and the same is true of the forum.

There may well be the case for creating a place on the website (but NOT the forum) for formal questions raised and when responded to.

Not necessarily the actual question (but I don't see why not), more a log showing:-
* question raised, when and by whom,
* date passed to director,
* expected date of response and by which director,
* date item closed

This may well bring an openness that some people desire.

[Phil Thomas]

However I do not accept Jim's implied suggestion that it is necessary to have a question poised at the Council meeting in order to have the constitution followed.

I did not imply such a thing.

I simply said that if there is a pressing need for a question to be raised to the directors, and a council meeting is impending, an alternative solution is available which is formally answered and recorded in minutes.

Derek quite rightly points out that not everybody reads minutes of proceedings, and the same is true of the forum.

There may well be the case for creating a place on the website (but NOT the forum) for formal questions raised and when responded to.

Not necessarily the actual question (but I don't see why not), more a log showing:-
* question raised, when and by whom,
* date passed to director,
* expected date of response and by which director,
* date item closed

This may well bring an openness that some people desire.

JIm,

OK change the key word from from imply to infer.
That is to say your words created unintended extrapolations in my mind.

I see nothing strange in my inference though.

An Interesting method you propose for directors responding to questions.

Did you or do you intend putting this forward to the next agm as a proposal?
Because publishing it on this notice board is unlikely to lead to directors taking action. As somebody posted recently "there is no formal requirement for Directors to respond to forum posts".

[Jim Webster]

I hadn't really thought about putting a proposal forward to the AGM or council - it was just an idea as I was constructing the post.

I don't know what other people think. To set it up as a proposal needs both a proposer and a seconder, and perhaps a bit refinement - but I don't know if there would be enough support for such a motion.

I don't really expect any director to actually respond to this - ) it's a discussion forum after all.

[Andy Howie]

I think it sounds an interesting idea. Need to give it some thought as to how to implement.

On Dereks Question about accounts. It was brought up yesterday. They are at the accountants and we hoped they would have been back. David is going to send them on to me the second he gets them and I will post on CS website and mail on to Council members

[Derek Howie]

On Dereks Question about accounts. It was brought up yesterday. They are at the accountants and we hoped they would have been back. David is going to send them on to me the second he gets them and I will post on CS website and mail on to Council members

Do we know what the reason for the delay is?