 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Rockets / August 2007Re: NYPower 12 (was Naram 49 Start Today!)
In article <94bnb318a8k8v7k44hn4o4fq8ae02cek20@4ax.com>, Phil Stein <PStein@ArielSystems.spamsks.net> writes: > Maybe we should vote for Art next year. It's not like the BOT is > doing so much that he will have a negative effect on anything plus who > knows maybe he'll come up with some new ideas. 67 did this time. The three trustees who will be up for reelection next year are Mark Bundick (president), Stew McNabb (Treasurer), and Joyce Guzik. All you need to do to get Mark out of the Prez job is to find someone to run for the board that can beat him. Good luck Art!  SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Sir, if I was building a weapon of mass destruction, you wouldn't be able to find it. >In article <94bnb318a8k8v7k44hn4o4fq8ae02cek20@4ax.com>, Phil Stein <PStein@ArielSystems.spamsks.net> writes: >> Maybe we should vote for Art next year. It's not like the BOT is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Good luck Art! My guess is that a significant percentage of the 67 wanted to see some new ideas floating around and that an even more significant percentage had a sick sense of humor. I haven't noticed many new ideas floating around in NAR but that could be me since I'm not interested in competition. Phil > My guess is that a significant percentage of the 67 wanted to see some > new ideas floating around and that an even more significant percentage > had a sick sense of humor. My guess is that Art recruited his section members to vote for him. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Sir, if I was building a weapon of mass destruction, you wouldn't be able to find it. >> My guess is that a significant percentage of the 67 wanted to see some >> new ideas floating around and that an even more significant percentage >> had a sick sense of humor. > > My guess is that Art recruited his section members to vote for him. Because they all certed with his saucers that required minimal(none?) skill for recovery and/or flight planning. Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 > >> My guess is that a significant percentage of the 67 wanted to see some > >> new ideas floating around and that an even more significant percentage [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > TRA#5512 > IEAS#75 Oooohhhh, that's gonna leave a mark. SignatureTweak >>> My guess is that Art recruited his section members to vote for him. >>> >> Because they all certed with his saucers that required minimal(none?) >> skill for recovery and/or flight planning. >> > Oooohhhh, that's gonna leave a mark. Did you know that Art formed is own prefect because other prefects would not let flyers cert with his saucers? Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 > >>> My guess is that Art recruited his section members to vote for him. > >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > TRA#5512 > IEAS#75 I did not know that. Interesting. SignatureTweak >>>> My guess is that Art recruited his section members to vote for him. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >TRA#5512 >IEAS#75 Also NAR & TRA banned cert's without active recovery which I think is good. Flyers should know how to successfully do active recovery. >> My guess is that a significant percentage of the 67 wanted to see some >> new ideas floating around and that an even more significant percentage >> had a sick sense of humor. > >My guess is that Art recruited his section members to vote for him. I seriously doubt that there are anything near 67 members in his section and there are not that many Art fans in the entire state of TX. >In article <94bnb318a8k8v7k44hn4o4fq8ae02cek20@4ax.com>, Phil Stein <PStein@ArielSystems.spamsks.net> writes: >> Maybe we should vote for Art next year. It's not like the BOT is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Good luck Art! Well, there are some interesting things about the BOT elections. First you only get to vote for a few each year, and you have to decide which to let go make room for new blood. Then there is the regional representation thing. The membership does not get to vote for the president, just BOT members, then the BOT elects officers, including the president. I remember one year when Bundick was elected to the BOT by the narrowest of margins, and then was promptly elected president of the NAR by the BOT. Alan > Well, there are some interesting things about the BOT elections. > First you only get to vote for a few each year, and you have to decide [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Alan IIRC, due to some of the ramifications of 501(c)3 rules, the election of the president has to be that way (i.e., BOT is elected directly, then president elected by BOT). I know this was true 20 years ago, don't know if it's still true today -- but is probably the reason it's in place... David Erbas-White On Aug 11, 12:10?am, David Erbas-White <der...@arachneering.com> wrote: > > Well, there are some interesting things about the BOT elections. > > First you only get to vote for a few each year, and you have to decide [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > the president has to be that way (i.e., BOT is elected directly, then > president elected by BOT). This is almost universal SOP for many corporations. The members/ stockholders elect the BOD, the BOD then elects an Executive Committee from members of the (new) board... IE President, VP, Sectretary, Treasurer, etc... Depending on the Corp, many hire execs, such as CEO's, CAO's. As far as 501(c)3 goes... this is the section of law that governs exempt status for not-for-profits where the IRS is concerned. The manner in which a board and/or officers are elected is governed by The Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws (AKA the Constitution) of the corporation and the statutes of the state in which incorporated. In other words the federal government does not govern the structure of corporations, only the taxes they pay - or don't pay when one is a 501(c)3. Doug SNIPS In > other words the federal government does not govern the structure of > corporations, only the taxes they pay - or don't pay when one is a > 501(c)3. > > Doug Bullshit. 501 c 3 and the treasury regs in 26 CFR adopted pursuant to the statute require certain provisions be in the Articles of Icorporation, including most s ignificantly a non inurement clause as to officers, directors and membrs; board election of officers, and several other provisions. If you want 501 C 3 status for you organization, fed law requires that your organization be structured, and actually operate, in very specific ways. > Well, there are some interesting things about the BOT elections. > First you only get to vote for a few each year, and you have to decide [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > BOT by the narrowest of margins, and then was promptly elected > president of the NAR by the BOT. Were any of the other 8 members of the BoT willing to take on the duties? Are any of the 8 other CURRENT members willing to do so? I've not heard any one else volunteer... SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Sir, if I was building a weapon of mass destruction, you wouldn't be able to find it. >> Well, there are some interesting things about the BOT elections. >> First you only get to vote for a few each year, and you have to decide [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Are any of the 8 other CURRENT members willing to do so? I've not heard any >one else volunteer... I have no objections to the process or Bundick as president. It is just interesting that Bundick may not have been elected president directly by the membership. It's almost like Bush becoming president. :( Alan >I have no objections to the process or Bundick as president. It is >just interesting that Bundick may not have been elected president >directly by the membership. Was the President of the Tripoli Rocketry Association, Inc., Ken Good, directly elected members of that organization? Glen Overby >> I have no objections to the process or Bundick as president. It is >> just interesting that Bundick may not have been elected president >> directly by the membership. > > Was the President of the Tripoli Rocketry Association, Inc., Ken Good, > directly elected members of that organization? Nope. Works the same way as the NAR. Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 >>> I have no objections to the process or Bundick as president. It is >>> just interesting that Bundick may not have been elected president [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Nope. Works the same way as the NAR. So I wonder why Mr. Jones found it so "interesting" that Bundick wasnn't directly elected by members? To me, it sure came across as another jab at NAR. Glen Overby >>>> I have no objections to the process or Bundick as president. It is >>>> just interesting that Bundick may not have been elected president [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > directly elected by members? To me, it sure came across as another jab at > NAR. I don't understand why people are taking jabs at either organization. Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 >>>>> I have no objections to the process or Bundick as president. It is >>>>> just interesting that Bundick may not have been elected president [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >I don't understand why people are taking jabs at either organization. Glenn is just pissing in the wind trying to start a flame war. Good luck with that, just stay well down wind of me. What I find "so interesting" Is that apparently there was a huge week long rocket launch just over a week ago, and the ONLY thing that gets mentioned on RMR is a an inconsequential HPR model that snagged a power line, swung down and broke a car window. It's a conspiracy I tell ya. Send out the dogs. Blow the whistle. Alert the BATFE. (OK one too many.) I bet Glenn is behind this conspiracy somehow. Even Kaplow is in one the conspiracy of RMR NARAM 49 silence. Who is going to the first hero to break ranks with the conspiracy and tell us what really happened at NARAM 49? Alan >Ted Novak >TRA#5512 >IEAS#75 > Who is going to the first hero to break ranks with the conspiracy > and tell us what really happened at NARAM 49? When was NARAM49? 8-) SignaturePluto downgraded? Get lost, Pluto. There's a new planet in town. Rocketry Planet — http://www.rocketryplanet.com > >>> I have no objections to the process or Bundick as president. It is > >>> just interesting that Bundick may not have been elected president [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Glen Overby And Bush. Doug > On 10 Aug 2007 23:41:01 -0500, kaplo...@encompasserve.org.mars (Bob > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Alan Yep... it's Bush's fault that Bunny got elected again. It always amazes me that the ones that always complain about who gets elected have little clue how a given system of voting works. And yes, NAR (& TRA) Presidents are elected by a "representive" process, much like Bush was elected... but it was by the process and not some nefarious conspiracy. Instead of bashing Bush - If you don't like the process then work to change it. Doug |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.