CCBot/2.0 (http://commoncrawl.org/faq/) British Columbia Geocaching Association —» Forums —» General Caching —» General —» Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM)
Home Newest Caches Forums Your Account About BCGA Search Blitz  
Nelson B.C.
Nelson B.C.:  [?] . A town where time has seemingly stood still. Turn-of-the-century ambiance lingers in every corner. [M | C
Toggle Content=  Register or Login  Please Join our Association 
topleft topfill topright
Toggle Content Our Sponsors
Gold Country
Worldcaching.comLandsharkz Coins and Geocaching GearGold CountryCaching Containers
bottomleft bottomfill bottomright
topleft topfill topright
Toggle Content Waypoints
bottomleft bottomfill bottomright
topleft topfill topright
Toggle Content Coming Events
bottomleft bottomfill bottomright
Forums —» General Caching —» General —» Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM)
toplefttopfilltopright
Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM)
If you have questions/comments about geocaching in general or anything that doesn't fit anywhere else, post them here.
Go to page Previous  1, 2
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index —» General

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
IRLPGUY



Joined: Mar 01, 2007
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:41 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

In a rather long-winded email to MaliBooBoo two nights ago I started a paragraph with these words: “Consider this thought for the forums” and I proceeded to present the following thoughts, here they are along with a refinement or two.

1) Create very clear, defined set of rules for posting to the forums.

2) Create a “Thread” in a new section of the forums away from the General section and call it Objectionable Posts or “whatever”. Allow member editing only in this thread.

3) Move any post that the moderator determines to be questionable and yet did not break the defined rules (yet to be determined) into this thread.

4) Allow the member 24 hrs to edit the post whereupon it could be returned to the original thread for the sake of continuity. (refined: had originally included the members ability to delete)

5) If the post was not edited in the prescribed time it could be left as an example or deleted as might be determined by discussion. (refined: from simply being deleted).

6) After an established number of posts being put in the Objectionable thread, the member would lose their privileges for a predetermined period of time.

7) If the member continued to make questionable posts then a further ban could be considered.

These suggestions along with MaliBooBoo’s and the thoughtful comments of Mr. Huggy can be dismissed or they can be considered, spoken to or added upon by anyone who might wish. If there is no call from the membership to seek changes, then there will be no need to proceed further.

Two years ago the Bylaws were amended to allow for electronic voting, several amendments to the Bylaws were presented and approved by the membership, they were then submitted and were also approved by the Registrar, at which time they became a part of the Bylaws. Therefore the Website has become a part of the BCGA for that very reason. We could not carry out the options presented to the Registrar for electronic voting were it not for the Website.

Because the forums are directly connected to the Website, it is my opinion that any concerns for either, can and should be addressed by the membership. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Back to top
scruffster



Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 1207
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:54 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

I miss being able to edit posts. But that had to be cut because people were writing inflammatory remarks to bait other people into an argument and then they'd quickly edit their original post to make it look like they were the nice guy.

I told the BCGA board of directors the minute they posted rules on the forums it would come back to bite them. And it did. When there were no posted rules the basic premise was if anyone had to ask about the rules, they really shouldn't be posting in the first place. I'm trying really hard not to say "I told you so." Posing rules opened up a pandora's box.

Bashers love rules. They use them to their advantage. They are quick studies and find any loophole. They skirt the rules just enough to make it difficult for moderators to question the post itself. By the same token they're inflammatory enough to bait others into an argument.

Unfortunately, the forums are going down a very slippery slope. The "free speechers" will not relent until the forums are degraded to their level. I find is sad that free speech is used as mission statement to behave badly. I do not believe that is what free speech is all about. Sad, very sad.

Well, there is going to be a new Geocaching Group starting in BC. And it will too have forums. I've been working with the organizers and they see clearly what has gone on in these forums and totally agree that it is outrageous. So, there should be a new place for geocachers to chat in British Columbia opening as early as next year. The organizers have told me that they will ensure it is a very positive place to share thoughts. My guess is a lot of people will be moving over there if these forums continue to degrade. As a past director and a current member I find it very sad but I do like the idea that there will be a place for those who want a safe, family oriented environment free of bullies. Stay tuned.
Back to top
katcogo



Joined: Feb 21, 2009
Posts: 539
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:08 am    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Thank you IRPLGUY for making several thoughtful suggestions.

My reading of the bylaw amendments regarding electronic voting do not specify that the electronic voting be carried out on the Society's website so the website is not "enshrined" in the bylaws. The directors may chose to have the voting carried out on a 3rd party website if they see fit, with an independent Returning Officer overseeing the voting process.

Indeed, any reference to the website in the bylaws in such a way as to require the Society to maintain a website may at some point in the future create a hardship to the Society.
Back to top
CAMOKELLY



Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 482
Location: Abbotsford BC

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:12 am    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

IRLPGUY wrote:
Because the forums are directly connected to the Website, it is my opinion that any concerns for either, can and should be addressed by the membership. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Interesting thought here and I'm glad IRLPGUY brought it up as I have questioned this in my mind in the past. I agree the membership definitely has a right to their opinion on how the website is being run including the forums section. However as to who has the right to make any changes is where it gets confusing for me. Let me give you a couple examples of what I mean. A forum being run by a company that sells a product naturally it's the company that has the only rights on how to govern their forums. Just as a group that runs a forum for say a gaming site same thing it's the group running the gaming site that has the rights.

Now this is where our site and forums get tricky. We are not a company or a small group. We are an association comprising of hundreds of members and thousands of users. Obviously someone created the website and forums and the charter members got them up and running for the first while as the membership grew. But somewhere in those early day's it was decided that the executive board members who are elected each year would be the ones to moderate the site and forums. Yes even site content gets moderated as any publicly submitted news story has to be approved first before it is published.

So it goes without saying that in the beginning it was either the website creator or the charter members who had the ownership rights. However when they made the decision to allow the executive to moderate did they also give away the ownership rights to each years executive as well? Or was ownership turned over to the association and it's members themselves? That to me is the question that needs to be clarified before any other steps should be taken.

As a side note this does not mean I disagree with the discussion happening in this thread right now. Quite the opposite as I am for it and do wish it to continue so we can gather enough discussion to formulate a questionnaire for the members.
Back to top
CAMOKELLY



Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 482
Location: Abbotsford BC

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:10 am    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Let me try another style of moderating and see how it is received. I did not chose this particular post for any other reason than it is the newest one that has come up that I feel needs moderating. So I will not remove this post or change it but will openly comment in bold type on what I feel should be moderated in it. I will continue to do this on any other negative posts in the near future to see if I can shed a different light back to the poster on how their posts might be interpreted by others.

scruffster wrote:
I miss being able to edit posts. But that had to be cut because people were writing inflammatory remarks to bait other people into an argument and then they'd quickly edit their original post to make it look like they were the nice guy.

Nothing to comment on this statement other than I have heard this all before.[/i]

I told the BCGA board of directors the minute they posted rules on the forums it would come back to bite them. And it did. When there were no posted rules the basic premise was if anyone had to ask about the rules, they really shouldn't be posting in the first place. I'm trying really hard not to say "I told you so." Posing rules opened up a pandora's box.

You comment of " I'm trying not to say I told you so " doesn't work. You might as well have just said it as it still feels condescending towards the BCGA.

Bashers love rules. They use them to their advantage. They are quick studies and find any loophole. They skirt the rules just enough to make it difficult for moderators to question the post itself. By the same token they're inflammatory enough to bait others into an argument.

Your negatively descriptive term for some of our posters is a form of baiting in itself and does not positively move this topic forward.[i]

Unfortunately, the forums are going down a very slippery slope. The "free speechers" will not relent until the forums are degraded to their level. I find is sad that free speech is used as mission statement to behave badly. I do not believe that is what free speech is all about. Sad, very sad.

Again a negatively descriptive term which only baits a reaction.


Well, there is going to be a new Geocaching Group starting in BC. And it will too have forums. I've been working with the organizers and they see clearly what has gone on in these forums and totally agree that it is outrageous. So, there should be a new place for geocachers to chat in British Columbia opening as early as next year. The organizers have told me that they will ensure it is a very positive place to share thoughts. My guess is a lot of people will be moving over there if these forums continue to degrade. As a past director and a current member I find it very sad but I do like the idea that there will be a place for those who want a safe, family oriented environment free of bullies.

This statement has slanderous and threatening tones to it and certainly does not address the topic of this thread. This part I would normally delete without any hesitation.[i]

Stay tuned.

Now this is just my interpretation of this post however as a moderator I could have deleted this entire post for any one of those reasons listed above. People please remember to read back to yourself before hitting submit.

Should a positive family friendly poster be using terms such as Bashers and Free Speechers or could you have use a more friendly description like those who appear to want to do harm or those who rely on free speech.

Should you be posting that our forums are outrageuos and that if nothing is changed will loose members to a forum you are obviously promoting as being apart of developing. One could take that as influencing members that this association is no good and should leave this association to join the new one you are self promoting.
Back to top
scruffster



Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 1207
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:22 am    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

I'd delete it. **lol** And yes, I told you so. **snarfle** When push comes to shove, the BCGA can moderate any way they want. That is my exact point.
Back to top
IRLPGUY



Joined: Mar 01, 2007
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:23 am    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

katcogo wrote:
Thank you IRPLGUY for making several thoughtful suggestions.

My reading of the bylaw amendments regarding electronic voting do not specify that the electronic voting be carried out on the Society's website so the website is not "enshrined" in the bylaws. The directors may chose to have the voting carried out on a 3rd party website if they see fit, with an independent Returning Officer overseeing the voting process.

Indeed, any reference to the website in the bylaws in such a way as to require the Society to maintain a website may at some point in the future create a hardship to the Society.

You are correct Katcogo there is no direct reference to this Website with respect to electronic voting, however I would point out that CanadianBacon has worked hard on developing a method in which to conduct that voting, it was obviously intended that the website be used for that purpose. My understanding is that testing is currently being conducted to assess the security of the voting process on this Website.

I do not know if there is a means to compare, but I would think that employing an independent 3rd party website would cost considerably more than hosting and maintaining the current website for the purpose of electronic voting, not to mention all the other benefits that are associated with maintaining this website. There certainly have been those Board members and members such as CB who are quite capable of maintaining a website. CB deserves tons of credit for his expertise and work on the website in both development and maintenance, the BCGA is fortunate to have him.

This website is acknowledged world wide as the website of the BCGA, I think it is already enshrined, maybe it is time to do so in the Bylaws.

I do not have a copy of last years financial statement, so can you tell me if the BCGA makes any expenditure related to the operation or hosting of this Website currently or in the past. Thank you.
Back to top
grafinator



Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 195
Location: Coruscant

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

It is nice to see people are starting to work together on this issue to find a solution that will make all forum users happy.

I think one advantage that would result in having a little more specificity in the TOU agreement is that users will know what is expected of them at all times.

The way I see it, each time there is a new executive voted in the TOU would change slightly because each person has a different opinion of what is and is not acceptable. What might be acceptable to one executive may not be acceptable to the next.

Keep the positive posts coming, this is an interesting topic.

_________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing. - Darth Vader
Back to top
katcogo



Joined: Feb 21, 2009
Posts: 539
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:22 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

IRLPGUY wrote:


You are correct Katcogo there is no direct reference to this Website with respect to electronic voting, however I would point out that CanadianBacon has worked hard on developing a method in which to conduct that voting, it was obviously intended that the website be used for that purpose. My understanding is that testing is currently being conducted to assess the security of the voting process on this Website.

I do not know if there is a means to compare, but I would think that employing an independent 3rd party website would cost considerably more than hosting and maintaining the current website for the purpose of electronic voting, not to mention all the other benefits that are associated with maintaining this website. There certainly have been those Board members and members such as CB who are quite capable of maintaining a website. CB deserves tons of credit for his expertise and work on the website in both development and maintenance, the BCGA is fortunate to have him.

This website is acknowledged world wide as the website of the BCGA, I think it is already enshrined, maybe it is time to do so in the Bylaws.

I do not have a copy of last years financial statement, so can you tell me if the BCGA makes any expenditure related to the operation or hosting of this Website currently or in the past. Thank you.

My comments had absolutely nothing to do with the vast investment of time and effort put into the electronic voting module. Yes, we are preparing a comprehensive test of the voting module to be started very shortly.

My comment was in response to your logic that the voting module would enshrine the website into the bylaws

IRLPGUY wrote:
wo years ago the Bylaws were amended to allow for electronic voting, several amendments to the Bylaws were presented and approved by the membership, they were then submitted and were also approved by the Registrar, at which time they became a part of the Bylaws. Therefore the Website has become a part of the BCGA for that very reason. We could not carry out the options presented to the Registrar for electronic voting were it not for the Website.

What I was trying to communicate is that just because a certain set of circumstances exist at this particular point does not mean that they will continue to exist in the exact same format forever.

Yes, there is a cost for operating the website as it is hosted externally. There is also a cost for website maintenance and development. This is not a huge expense at the moment and the Society is at this point able to handle the cost. This may not always be the case.

The purpose of a good set of bylaws is that they are strong enough yet flexible enough to not require constant changes or tweaking. Many societies never review their bylaws, and many have a review every few years to ensure they are still relevant.

The bylaws state the overall purpose and direction for the Society and set the procedures for elections and financing. They should be separate from the day to day operations. These day to day operations would include the website and other SOPs.

I think this discussion of the TOU is interesting and I hope it will continue to provide respectful and thoughtful input from the members. I still feel very strongly that they should not be enshrined in the bylaws, other than perhaps become a formalized part of the SOPs.

Yes, every executive will interpret the TOU in their own way. Yes, these may not be to the liking of each member. The members elect the executive they feel will best represent their views so it follows they may interpret the TOU.

I personally am excited about the electronic voting for the executive as it will let EVERY member have their voice heard, not just the members who happen to live in the area the AGM is being held, or those who made the sometimes considerable effort to make the journey to the meeting.
Back to top
grafinator



Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 195
Location: Coruscant

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:13 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Quote::
Yes, there is a cost for operating the website as it is hosted externally. There is also a cost for website maintenance and development. This is not a huge expense at the moment and the Society is at this point able to handle the cost. This may not always be the case.

What exactly is the cost to the BCGA of running this website?

I can't see it being relevant to this topic at all considering the thousands of dollars the BCGA has in its account the last time I heard.

_________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing. - Darth Vader
Back to top
CAMOKELLY



Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 482
Location: Abbotsford BC

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:23 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Our site is hosted by from what I hear is a quite reasonably priced host. Comparable if not better than most out there. I do not know the exact amount but i'm sure it is under the average price. It's relevancy to the topic simply came from IRLPGUY asking the question so It was answered. The BCGA does have a very healthy bank account one I for one am uncomfortable in us having being that we are non profit so the cost of the website is well covered.


Last edited by CAMOKELLY on Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
grafinator



Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 195
Location: Coruscant

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:36 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Thanks Kelly.

Just out of curiosity, I am in no way bashing the BCGA or complaining at all about how things currently are run financially, does a non-profit organization have to spend a certain amount of money it brings in to remain a non-profit organization, or anything like that?

Is there a place one can look at the rules, just for curiosity sakes?

I guess this question may be considered off topic.

_________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing. - Darth Vader
Back to top
Fonty Family



Joined: Nov 15, 2009
Posts: 149
Location: Kelowna

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

grafinator wrote:
Thanks Kelly.

Just out of curiosity, I am in no way bashing the BCGA or complaining at all about how things currently are run financially, does a non-profit organization have to spend a certain amount of money it brings in to remain a non-profit organization, or anything like that?

Is there a place one can look at the rules, just for curiosity sakes?

I guess this question may be considered off topic.

Canada revenue agency has some guidelines that are in place with respect to not-for profit organizations. the link below will answer some of the questions, specifically look at paragraphs 5-10.

www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pu...96r-e.html
Back to top
katcogo



Joined: Feb 21, 2009
Posts: 539
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:52 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

We are a registered non-profit society. At this time we are only accountable to our members for our financial dealings. We do not file our financial statements with the Registrar of Companies (also responsible for societies).

If we were a registered charity, able to issue tax receipts for donations, we would be required to file an annual Charity Information Return which is the charities form of a Tax Return. In that form we would be required to meet a disbursement quota to ensure that we are spending the majority of our donated funds on our charitable activities. This ensures that we are accountable to our donors as well as our members.

Some of our members also donate to the BCGA and we are deeply appreciative of this type of support. Being very careful on how we spend our money has ironically led to us being in the position of having a healthy surplus. This allows us to continue to be able not to charge membership fees to our members and helps us to continue to grow our membership base.
Back to top
katcogo



Joined: Feb 21, 2009
Posts: 539
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:56 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Yes, this discussion is getting off topic but I think it is a very healthy discussion.
Back to top
grafinator



Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 195
Location: Coruscant

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:56 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Thanks for the post, that is exactly what I was curious about.

_________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing. - Darth Vader
Back to top
CAMOKELLY



Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 482
Location: Abbotsford BC

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:57 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Thanks Kathy I hope that answers your question Grafinator.
Back to top
CAMOKELLY



Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 482
Location: Abbotsford BC

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:58 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

LOL ok good
Back to top
IRLPGUY



Joined: Mar 01, 2007
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 6:09 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Thank you for your response Katcogo. I am sorry if you or I misinterpreted the others meaning, I do find your responses rather condescending but prefer to believe that was not intended and again was misinterpreted.

Thank you for the information that we do indeed bear a financial burden with respect to the website.

For the sake of clarity, the “BCGA Constitution” states the purpose or purposes of the Society. The BCGA Bylaws are a very “specific” set of rules which state how the Society must operate in implementing the Constitution. They are not flexible. The only flexibility they allow is though the ability to amend those Bylaws through very “specific” means.

Again just for clarity, a set of SOP’s is not used by all organizations and in fact those established for the BCGA reference only three area’s of the operation of the Society, Those being Membership, Regional Representation and Meetings, and do not refer to either the website or the forums. Note also that the Societies Bylaws supercede the SOP in all instances where a conflict might exist.

It is perhaps interesting that Item 2(a) of the BCGA Constitution states “To provide a portal to geocaching in and around BC. I might interpret the reference to portal to mean through the means of this website, while others might not. The answer might come from those that first established the Association and the Website. Perhaps MrGigibyte could speak to that.

I think Kelly made some very interesting observations and posed some interesting questions. The Domain Name www.bcgeocaching.com is registered to the BCGA, therefore one would naturally assume the Website itself is a very integral part of the Association. If indeed the reference to “portal” in the Constitution refers to the website, then I again would assume it was intended to be an integral part of the BCGA from the outset as well. If the above assumptions are correct then the Website, hence the forums within the website, should be administered in the same manner as any other area of the Association. That would be by the wishes of the majority of the membership and not the Board alone.

I stand to be corrected, but I don’t think anyone was proposing that the TOU be included in the Bylaws. My original request was simply to have them addressed at the AGM. Being addressed and attempting to develop a whole new set of rules at an AGM are completely different. I would have been happy to have the topic put on the agenda and a motion made to provide some means of input from the membership in order to move forward. That very thing is taking place now in these forums. Hopefully anyone wishing to contribute will do so. This is one of the many potential uses of the forums, which allows members an opportunity to voice their opinions and provide input to the Board. I think the Association is far better served with the forums, than without them.

If the statement, “every executive will interpret the TOU in their own way” is true, then it underlines the need for “everyone” to be very clear what is, and is not allowed in the forums, inclusive of anyone outside the Executive who might moderate the forums. Subjective interpretation can and will certainly lead to misuse or abuse by one or all parties.
Back to top
Cuddlefish



Joined: Oct 20, 2008
Posts: 298

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:37 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

IRLPGUY wrote:
. If the above assumptions are correct then the Website, hence the forums within the website, should be administered in the same manner as any other area of the Association. That would be by the wishes of the majority of the membership and not the Board alone.
.

If we find it hard to agree with just 5 of us on the board, can you imagine asking the opinion of all 400 members every time we need to moderate?

We made up the rules for this year's Blitz without consulting the membership, and the BCGA organised the placement of 100 BC Parks caches without consulting the membership. We have decided to make a coin this year too. I could go on and on with all the decisions that the board have made on behalf of the membership that elected them.

Am I misunderstanding your post? I am not sure why this aspect of the association needs such micromanagement while other aspects, such as how the association board spends the society's money gets hardly any attention? (Except for around the AGM).
Back to top
katcogo



Joined: Feb 21, 2009
Posts: 539
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 10:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

IRLPGUY wrote:
Thank you for your response Katcogo. I am sorry if you or I misinterpreted the others meaning, I do find your responses rather condescending but prefer to believe that was not intended and again was misinterpreted.

I am sorry if you thought my responses are condescending, that was certainly not my intention. You seemed to jump on my comments about the electronic voting so I was pointing out that you started that part of the discussion. I was proposing a "what if" scenario that may happen at some point in the future.

IRLPGUY wrote:
Again just for clarity, a set of SOP’s is not used by all organizations and in fact those established for the BCGA reference only three area’s of the operation of the Society, Those being Membership, Regional Representation and Meetings, and do not refer to either the website or the forums. Note also that the Societies Bylaws supercede the SOP in all instances where a conflict might exist.

I am aware not every society has a set of SOP. The discussion at the AGM may be to place the TOU as it applies to the forums into the SOP.

IRLPGUY wrote:
It is perhaps interesting that Item 2(a) of the BCGA Constitution states “To provide a portal to geocaching in and around BC. I might interpret the reference to portal to mean through the means of this website, while others might not. The answer might come from those that first established the Association and the Website. Perhaps MrGigibyte could speak to that.

Yes, I find that term to be somewhat nebulous. There is a danger where a term is not clear to everyone that it may be open to personal interpretation.

The dictionary definition of "portal" is:
1. A doorway, entrance, or gate, especially one that is large and imposing.
2. An entrance or a means of entrance: the local library, a portal of knowledge.
3. The portal vein.
4. A website considered as an entry point to other websites, often by being or providing access to a search engine.

I can't at this point imagine the BCGA without a website but it would hamper an executive in the future if they were forced by the bylaws to continue one if there were ever a situation where the membership believes it no longer requires one.
Back to top
IRLPGUY



Joined: Mar 01, 2007
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:20 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

I am sorry cuddlefish if I was not clear in what I said in my post. In response to Kelly’s post I was attempting to speak to the questions he posed as to who should manage the forums and what was passed over and what was not. Perhaps I was off topic in responding to his post.

I was also trying to make a connection to the Website and the Association from the inception of the Association. There may be no connection at all and I asked MrGigibyte to speak to that. My assumptions were presented as assumptions and not as fact. I felt this would perhaps lead to answers to those questions Kelly had posed.

I thought this thread had progressed to the point that the membership was being allowed to have input with respect to the forums, with the possibility of forming a questionnaire being put to the membership as to it’s future management. I hope that my comments and that of any other person do not stifle that progression. I hope also it does not stifle any attempt to make any connection to the website/forums and the Association if one exists.

I hope we are back on topic now.
Back to top
IRLPGUY



Joined: Mar 01, 2007
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:38 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

katcogo wrote:


Yes, I find that term to be somewhat nebulous. There is a danger where a term is not clear to everyone that it may be open to personal interpretation.

The dictionary definition of "portal" is:
1. A doorway, entrance, or gate, especially one that is large and imposing.
2. An entrance or a means of entrance: the local library, a portal of knowledge.
3. The portal vein.
4. A website considered as an entry point to other websites, often by being or providing access to a search engine.

I can't at this point imagine the BCGA without a website but it would hamper an executive in the future if they were forced by the bylaws to continue one if there were ever a situation where the membership believes it no longer requires one.

I think the original intent of the use of the word portal can be addressed by the founders of the Association, I would hope that they might be contacted or might see the posts and address it in the forum.

I can see no circumstance arising that the membership would wish to discontinue the Website. However if the word portal was meant to refer to this Website then that reference could be removed with approval of the Registrar. Were there any references in the Bylaws they could also be amended to reflect the change in direction of the Association. There is latitude allowed in changing some of the purposes of the Association as long as they do not change the overall purpose. Certainly the Bylaws can be changed by Special Resolution.

Darn are we off topic again…..I am old and going to bed.
Back to top
Cuddlefish



Joined: Oct 20, 2008
Posts: 298

PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:47 pm    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

I'd love to add more, but I am off to Chilliwack tomorrow to have lunch with my husband's (almost) 90 year old Grandmother and someone has all these neat geocaches out there that require all these puzzles to be solved first. Jester

Hee off topic, I know, but I'm enjoying these puzzles. Party Hat
Back to top
IRLPGUY



Joined: Mar 01, 2007
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2011 8:20 am    Post subject: Re: Forums TOU (Was 2011 AGM) Reply with quote

Wish we were able to provide sunshine for you, will work on that but no promises...

Have fun.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index —» General
Page 2 of 2
All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Go to page Previous  1, 2



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


bottomleftbottomright
topleft topfill topright
Advertisement
bottomleft bottomfill bottomright

:: Copyright 2003 - 2009 BC Geocaching Association ::

RSS Feed:
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BCGeocaching
Interactive software released under GNU GPL, Code Credits, Privacy Policy
Theme by British Columbia Geocaching Association.