I love my alias

So we're changing ISPs here in the Crawford household. So I had to notify everyone in my address book of my new all-purpose email address. Quite a pain in the neck, despite the  fact that I'm looking forward to cutting down on my spam.

One fun thing that results is all the bounce messages I'm getting back, particularly from friends with AOL service. I'm trying to look at this as an opportunity to cull my address files.

What I am really appreciating is how easy it is to do an address change seamlessly with all my Mensa connections. One call to Howard asking him to point my Communications@ alias to my new address and voila-- every elist, every publication, every committee.... is instantly updated.

Appointed Officers Issue, continued

I was responding to comments from yesterday's post, but decided to just make it a new post.

For what it's worth, I doubt I'd ever have thought to run for Communications Officer. Would I do this job if I couldn't speak and vote as a equal with the rest of the AMC? I'm not sure. I like to think I bring useful expertise to the table, but getting to vote is not the pay-off for me, that's for certain.

And if it's a matter of no one should vote who isn't chosen by their constituents, then should we continue to allow 60% of RVCs to vote, despite the fact that they were, in some sense, not elected by their regions? At least in the case of the appointees, there are 17 people voting to put them in office. How many people voted for the uncontested RVCs?

Question re: Appointed vs Elected Officers

So as you know, I'm on the Governance Task Force. I'd like some input:

What are the pros and cons to making the Development, Membership, and Communications Officers elected by the whole membership instead of appointed by the Chair with the approval of the AMC?