GTF Report nearly wrapped

I think I have finished the 54-page Governance Task Force Report, despite being at 'WeeM all weekend and having no Internet access at home.

I'll post a link to it later this week.

Now to write my other four regular reports and then find a coffee shop so I can email them.

- Posted using my iPhone

Crawling out of the Hole Part 6

May 31, 2010:
    Assets: $4,548,011.44
    Liabilities: $6,216,502.72
    Net Assets: ($1,668,491.28)

August 31, 2010:
    Assets: $4,107,513.150
    Liabilities: $5,805,550.50
    Net Assets: ($1,698,037.35)

Looks like the trend in Net Assets going in the wrong direction is slowing, but not reversed yet. On the other hand, there are significant once-a-year costs associated with the Annual Gathering and as near as I can tell from my monthly financial reports, the income from the AG has not been booked yet.

"Payoff" of AMC Meetings

So yes, I read MPol, and yes, I find the noise to signal ratio to be too high to be worth really paying attention to. However, every now and then someone says something that makes me go "hmmmm…"

Recently Cary wrote "If dues subsidized meetings of governors are so critical to Mensa's success, then when can we expect to start seeing the payoff that no other way could accomplish?"

I think this is a very good question for the AMC to be asking itself, although I'd like to have "payoff" defined more clearly. I've been privy to the electronic and teleconference discussions of the AMC for nearly 6 years. If the "payoff" is  wiser, better-reasoned and more thoroughly discussed decisions and more efficient and effective collaboration on developing ideas and plans, then I assert that we are seeing a payoff from face-to-face meetings.

But does "payoff" means something else? What?

Ossified Committees

Sometimes I just need to vent.

So I'm working on the Governance Task Force and one frequent complaint theme from the survey we sent out is that the AMC doesn't seek member input enough; in particular, the opinions of committee members are ignored.

This just make me steam! I am on several committees, and run more than a few. More often then not, when I put an issue out and directly ask for input, edits, suggestions, ideas, better text.... I get nothing. Nada. Not even a "let me think on it a few days and get back to you."

Recently, I wrote up an updated version of the Internet Services Policy and sent it to ComComm asking for their input. No responses. I sent it to the AMC, and again, no responses. No one even politely offered to second it, so it's not even on the agenda.

On the GTF, the same thing occurs. People are all keen to be involved in changing the structure of AML, but most of the TF has not responded to any direct requests for contributions.

So I have to wonder-- is this a widespread phenomena? is it just how Mensans are-- wanting to feel included but unwilling to participate? Is it just me-- am I somehow always right on the first go-round? Do I intimidate others from voicing their thoughts? Is there a sense of "Robin's on it, so I can relax and not bother"?

Sometimes I feel like Henny Penny.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Off-Topic: Kid Pictures

This has nothing to do with Mensa, but I'm a proud mom and I have my own blog and...well... the pictures from Homecoming turned out really nice, so....