|
|
It's the intention of the founder of The Force to create a flexible framework for the APA's running and generally let things handle themselves over the years through an exercise of good judgement, and a friendly APA spirit.
The founder of The Force isn't real big on long sets of rules and litigious debates over what those rules mean. I'm hoping the original constitution will serve as a nice general framework, and that good judgement, and a friendly APA spirit will build The Force's own traditions and will guide the APA far more than a particular set of rules.
But to give members of The Force some guidance in terms of what I've envisioned beyond what's down in black and white in the constitution, I'm listing these guidelines. I don't consider any of this binding on anyone, but I hope it'll help set a positive tone for the APA in years to come.
General Philosophy I hope this APA provides a forum for lively, supportive, enthusiastic and, most of all, friendly discussion of Star Wars and everything else that interests its members.
My prejudices, developed over years of APA-hacking, lean very much toward freedom of expression, acceptance of differing viewpoints and the avoidance of bitter feuding. Each member is entitled to their own opinions and may express and discuss them. I would like, however, for people to discuss these things civilly without turning it into feud.
I am hopeful both my performance in the APA and the framework I am committing to paper here and in the constitution will help make that a reality for The Force.
First off, take notice of the fact that my opening specifies that the APA is devoted to any topic of interest to the membership. I want to avoid any tendency for this APA to start judging the worth and appropriateness of different types of discussion. If it interests you, it's appropriate for the APA. Though, do try to keep some discussion on Star Wars.
I plan to keep enlarging the membership roster to accommodate everyone who wants in until we reach 50, at which time a waitlist will be instituted.
I suggest the copy count always be maintained at 3-5 copies more than the size of the roster or the combined size of the roster and the waitlist, until the ceiling of 60 is reached (though some stability in the copy count is wise -- members will find it difficult to keep track of a constantly fluctuating copy count).
Remember that if we fill the 50-member roster and get a large waitlist, the constitution can be amended to raise the copy count above 60. If that point is reached, it would then be up to the membership to decide if the added cost of a higher copy count is worthwhile to ensure that more WLers get full mailings.
In the meantime, I strongly encourage members to send in extra copies of zines for inclusion in "overrun mailings" that can be sent to those WLers who don't get full copies of the mailings.
Deadlines will come up every two months, in the even-numbered months of February, April, June, August, October and December. Our deadlines currently are usually the second Monday of the month, giving leeway for holidays.
As for what counts toward minac, I feel that anything that's been copied by the member should count, but strongly encourage the membership to always submit at least the minimum activity requirement's worth of original material, because you're not going to get much out of the APA experience if you don't generate some of your own material.
While there's no specific provision in the constitution for extensions when a member fails to meet the minimum activity requirement (minac), I anticipate granting extensions when the member has faced unusual circumstances to prevent him from meeting minac, and the member has requested an extension.
It's not the intention of the founder, nor will it be my practice during the APA's first year, to consider airmail delivery of mailings to members living outside North America as an ordinary distribution expense. Members from outside North America will be asked to themselves pay the difference between surface rate and air mail if they desire the speedier delivery of air mail.
It is with regret that I force that considerable expense on overseas members, since I understand that it's next to impossible for overseas members to enjoy APAs on a timely basis without airmail delivery.
But I also believe dividing that considerable cost among the members will create a significant ongoing financial burden to the membership, and it's my general goal to keep the mandated costs of The Force membership as low as is practical.
I welcome and encourage participation from overseas members and urge individual domestic members to assist overseas members as much as possible by such steps as volunteering to print their zines.
Any leftover mailings can be sold to non member/non-WLers and can be sent out to prospective new members whenever active recruitment is being pursued.
It's the feeling of the founder that the best way to run an APA is to generally entrust the decision-making machinery to the person who's doing all the work as the CM. Also, the APA will develop its own set of traditions and preferences over time, which will give the CM a lot of guidance in exercising the necessary discretion of the job.
I also suggest the CM be guided by The Force's founding principles -- common sense; common courtesy; a spirit of friendliness and tolerance; freedom of expression; the treatment of fellow members as one would have them treat oneself; and the discretion of the CM.
The founder also suggests that "The Force Guidelines" and "The Force Introduction to APAs" be referred to in settling matters seemingly left unclear by the constitution.
It's always wise for a CM to gauge the will of the membership and to usually reflect it in the exercise of CM discretion. But the CM leads, and occasionally that means taking a stand contrary to current APA sentiment and then taking your lumps for it. One recommended way for the CM to gauge membership attitudes is to conduct informal, non-binding "straw-poll" votes when it seems like a good idea. Less formally, the CM can always encourage discussion of questions important to the running of the APA.
The CMship is a job and a responsibility -- it entails significant service and sacrifice for the APA with no tangible reward. It is not the chance to tell others what to do, it is a chance to devote a great deal of time and energy (sometimes even your own money) to the APA. Bitter contests for the "power " of the Cmship are lethal poison to APAs and to avoid it, I am planning to remain the CM as long as I can handle it. Should the need arise for me to vacate the post, I will institute elections using the following guidelines:
Candidates will be called for, followed by campaign zines. The ballot will go out in the mailing following the campaign zines, with the results being announced in the mailing after that. Elections will then be held yearly after that, following the same months.
It's my recommendation that the APA elect qualified, respected CMs and then allow a fair amount of discretion in the interpreting of the constitution.
To reduce the chances of rancor during the election process, it is advised that a "third-party" member generally considered fair, level-headed and objective, be agreed upon by all candidates to receive and count the ballots.
The "Australian Ballot" system, to determine a majority if three or more candidates split the vote, will work like this:
When there are more than two candidates, voters will indicate their second choice (and third and fourth if more than three candidates have run). If one candidate fails to get a majority, the CM will eliminate from the count the votes for candidates placing third (and further down) and instead check on those ballots who the second (and third, etc.) choices were to determine each voters preference between the two top vote-getters. A majority vote will be determined that way.
This system is manipulatable, especially when similar candidates "split" a vote, so candidates are advised to consider the possibilities and campaign accordingly. Despite the possibility of manipulation, this system greatly decreases the chances of a second vote and the delays and/or wasted postage that could entail.
Whatever attitude we have toward our CM should start and finish with gratitude and admiration for their willingness to take on these responsibilities and sacrifices.
Note that I've included no provision for the removal of the CM. It's my feeling that any fair mechanism would take 3-4 mailings to work, and the CM is in for only 6 mailings anyway. If the membership elects a bad CM, the best recourse is probably to just take your medicine for the rest of that term and then vote more carefully in the future. It's certainly possible that someday a CM will have to be replaced under emergency circumstances, but I figure that the APA will be able to figure out the best way to do that on the spot -- concerned responsible members will step forward.
If there's ever an instance in which the APA's survival seems threatened by a poor CM, I figure the membership at that time will be able to determine appropriate action. Coming up with a mechanism now for that circumstance seems to me to be inviting trouble or at least leaving a "loaded gun" around that could be used inappropriately.
Generally, amending the constitution is discouraged. If The Force is going to operate smoothly, it will be because of the spirit of the membership, not the wording of its rules. But when formal changes are necessary, the mechanism is there. Multiple-choice amendment votes are discouraged, especially since a majority of members is required to pass anything. It's my suggestion that complicated issues lending themselves to a variety of solutions be narrowed down to one specific proposal through informal "straw-poll" votes to gauge membership attitudes.
Home Constitution Intro to APAs