Ralph's Motions Part 1

Ralph Rudolph, RVC 6, has proposed several motions to the AMC for inclusion on the November meeting agenda. As some members wish to read AMC members’ pre-meeting thoughts and in the spirit of transparency, I am placing them here on my blog (with permission) and making my comments on them open to the public. Please note that the motions are drafts meant for discussion at this time and not necessarily the version that may or may not be voted on.

Motion about more explanation requirements for motions

1. Moved R. Rudolph, seconded _______ that whenever a motion is proposed, that the movers list why the proposed action would (1) improve recruitment, (2) assist local group officers in their efforts, (3) materially prevent problems, and/or (4) lead to greater membership satisfaction.

Explanation: If we are to develop a strategic vision for Mensa, that vision should be a proactive one, i.e. how can we improve Mensa for all of our members. Merely considering financial impact makes us appear as accountants, not leaders, and diminishes our focus on real matters.

Financial impact: happier members and an AMC thinking for our future.

Further Explanation: This puts forth a positive image of AMC as being strongly focused on improving Mensa in all ways. If members view AMC and AML more positively, it will involve more Members recommending Mensa to their friends and make them more willing to work towards recruitment; If members have more of a positive image of AMC and AML, they will more likely volunteer to assist their local groups, making the LocSec's and Editor's jobs easier; this will help eliminate the problem of seeing AMC as a closed monolithic group focused on itself; members seeing that AMC is positively addressing motions for their benefit will bring joy.

Robin’s thoughts:
My first response is a bit snarky, I admit. I’d like to know how this motion will improve recruitment, assist LG officers, prevent problems, or lead to greater satisfaction.

While I think these are absolutely things the AMC should bear in mind when taking actions, requiring a mover to formally write it up for inclusion with a motion is just going to lead to more bullshit, much like some of the financial statements.

When I was a Special Ed teacher, we had to have written, measurable objectives for everything students did in class. Since so often what went on in class was spontaneous grasping at teachable moments or quick responses to students’ immediate needs, this formal requirement led to great creativity. For example, I recall actually writing an objective: “Student will demonstrate mastery of stress-reducing, self-relaxation techniques in order to improve on-task concentration.”

Yup. I meant the kid took a nap. Sometimes, that’s what is necessary.

Ralph’s “Further Explanation” claims this motion will “put forth a positive image of AMC as being strongly focused on improving Mensa in all ways.” Yes, it would. But it would be an image based on pretty words—ranking right up there with “family values” and I doubt our membership is foolish enough to be satisfied with that.

Ralph goes on to write about all the wonderful things that will happen if members view the AMC and Mensa in general more positively. Some I agree with, some I don’t (the volunteering more bit, for example; come on… it’s all about how much time people have to give, not whether or not they love the AMC—we’re just not all that important to most members, fer crissakes). But…

I do not see how requiring movers to fluff up their motions with pretty explanations about how it will improve recruitment, assist LG officers, prevent problems, or lead to greater satisfaction will actually achieve any of those very noble goals.

IMO, this motion should be a guiding philosophical principle, but not another inflexible rule that will only lead to creative explanations with little substance.