Excellent quality of video feed at NB / National Board Aug '11

[CAPSGT]

Can anybody confirm who the new  Chief of Chaplains will be? Thanks

The new Chief of Chaplains will be Ch, Col (select) Delano Ellis (GLR HC) who will assume duties and responsibilities tomorrow evening following the change of command.

Has anyone heard who were confirmed to the other national staff positions?  The only other one I have heard is that Col Ed Phelka will be the National Controller.

[NIN]

Having read *most* of this thread, and not having paid tremendous attention to the events leading up to the NB, I don't have the energy to sift thru countless pages of "he said, she said" and all the posturing and puffery and outright buffonery and disrespect in all the previous threads referenced here.

I don't know Fred Weiss (I swear, Fred, I don't think I ever met you at an NH Wing conference, and if I did and don't remember, I'm really sorry. I am terrible with names sometimes. I can tell you about a joke a buddy told me in Civics class in 9th grade, but I can't tell you what I had for dinner last night, so take it for what its worth!<GRIN>) and I only met Chuck Carr at Leo Burke's change of command last July in Flint, Michigan.  Both of these gentlemen could be fantastic leaders for CAP, or complete duds, I have no earthly idea.

But watching the back and forth in this thread alone both amazes and disgusts me, and in a lot of ways reminds me why, when pressed to become a wing commander, I declined.   The sheer amount of politics, backbiting, infighting, disrespect, character assassination, mudslinging and buffoonery I see occurring at the "echelons above reality" just make me think that to want to be on the NB/NEC, or become the National Commander, you either have to have tremendously thick skin, an incredibly strong commitment to CAP, or an undiagnosed mental disorder.

BTW, I have met Ned Lee and have, over the years, had a lot of very good conversations with the man. In the 28 years I spent in CAP, I don't think I ever met anybody who had a better grasp of the organization's strengths, shortcomings and foibles. 

Some folks have said "Draft Ned as the National Commander!!," and just like those people who said to me "You should be a wing commander!," I say "What, don't you like the guy?  Why would you wish that on Nedly?"

But as far as I'm concerned, the bottom line with Ned, to me, is that Ned is not going to lie to you. He may not tell you everything, for reasons of propriety or ethics or whatever, but he's not going to mislead and lie to you.   If I'm presented with two differing bits of information on the same subject, one from Ned and one from an unknown source, I'm going to tend to believe Ned.

The whole NDA thing.

What was the purpose of the NDA as someone stated?  "protect sensitive information that could be detrimental to the organization or the members if released improperly" 

So follow my thread here:

1) Someone violated the NDA that they signed (a pretty unethcial thing to do) and supplied *mostly* accurate information to people who were not in the meeting, not party to the NDA, and likely shouldn't have had the information in the first place. So the info from an NDA-covered meeting was "released improperly."

2) Along the way, someone added some things that were *not* accurate (ie. the "paid national commander" bit) and probably interjected some personal bias into the info ("I bet this is an attempt by Courter to consolidate her reign..").  Wow.  A game of telephone played via the Internet.  Whoda thunk it?   

(Mind you: This is how all these crazy Internet memes get going:  They take something that is truthful (let me use a photo of Barack Obama walking onto Marine One as an example), then add their own personal spin ("You will notice he's not returning the salute of the Marine guard.."), and the next thing you know you're getting an email forwarded from your great aunt (the one who still has AOL) with about 500 forwarding lines that says "This is disgraceful, the President has no regard for the military!  He should be impeached!"  Never mind that the photo was taken a split second before or after he returned the Marine's salute.) 

3)  That information subsequently gets repeated (here) by an member who eventually becomes a candidate for National Commander.  A long drawn out discussion about the factual and non-factual (ie. "inaccurate") things from that closed-door meeting ensues.  And of course, since none of us were in the meeting, we can't confirm whether or not the information is completely accurate (what is that old saw about only believing 1/10th of what you read on the Internet?)

4) During the National Board meeting, the candidate for the National Commander is called out for repeating the (mostly accurate) information that was included in the email along with other (inaccurate) information.  Partly due to the controversy surrounding the NDA, the accuracy of the information or whatever, the candidate is not elected to the National Commander.

Now, lads there ya go:  "protect sensitive information that could be detrimental to the organization or the members if released improperly" (emphasis mine)

I don't know if Fred Weiss would have been the greatest National Commander since Johnnie Boyd or not.  Maybe. Maybe not.  (BTW, I just plucked Johnnie Boyd out of thin air. He was my first National Commander when I was a cadet.  Since we didn't have the Internet or CAP-Talk, I have no idea whether he orchestrated a CAP equivalent of the "Night of the Long Knives" at two successive National Board meetings or if he really truly was an awesome National Commander.  Think about that one for a minute)

But suppose for a minute (and I'm doing some rhetorical supposition here) Fred Weiss is really the guy who could have taken CAP to the next level in the 21st Century. (maybe he is, maybe he isn't, I don't know, I'm being rhetorical here)

But, Fred was not elected, in part because some dirtbag decided that his word wasn't worth the piece of paper the NDA was written on and leaked what eventually turned out to be the CAP equivalent of an Internet meme that Fred repeated on CAP-Talk. 

Was the information covered by that NDA earth shattering? Probably not. But in the hands of individuals with purely selfish intentions toward CAP, it became a vehicle. A weapon. A speeding truck bomb of misinformation headed right toward downtown Louisville.

Like I said, I don't know if Fred was truly the next great thing for CAP. Maybe, maybe not.

But if he was, or any individual was, and this kind of drama, instigated by people who apparently don't hold the organization they belong to in high enough regard to follow through with the agreement they signed,  managed to torpedo a golden opportunity to move the organization forward not by increments (which we seem to have been doing for a good many years), but by orders of magnititude, then don't you agree that the information leaked eventually was "detrimental to the organization or the members if released improperly"?

Call it the "CAP Butterfly Effect"

[davidsinn]

Now, lads there ya go:  "protect sensitive information that could be detrimental to the organization or the members if released improperly" (emphasis mine)

You made a lot of good points but I want to address this. The simplest solution would have been to not hide it in the first place. If it was released, none of this would have happened. Look at how much trouble has been cause by this secret squirrel crap.

[NIN]

Now, lads there ya go:  "protect sensitive information that could be detrimental to the organization or the members if released improperly" (emphasis mine)

You made a lot of good points but I want to address this. The simplest solution would have been to not hide it in the first place. If it was released, none of this would have happened. Look at how much trouble has been cause by this secret squirrel crap.

I agree that most of what the NB/NEC does should be transparent.  But there are plenty of things that demand closed session.   I don't think it was out of line for the NB to go into a closed session on that subject (if, indeed, that was the subject discussed).

I belong to the US Parachute Association.  Last summer, they held their "twice a year" board meeting about 1/2 mile from my office in Nashua, NH.

The organization had just gone thru a big proxy effort in advance of the meeting to allow the board to make a change to the bylaws to allow online voting (the USPA has a BOD and then there are regional directors.. All are "elected" by the membership every 2 years).  The bylaws required at least 10% of the membership to vote by proxy to allow that change to the bylaws.  I declined to present a proxy and instead attended the meeting (my first in 16 years in that organization, and only because it was literally in my backyard) and voted as part of the process.

Immediately after that bylaw change vote (which passed, BTW), the board motioned to move into a closed session for part of its business.  We all jumped up and filed out of the room.

Why? Not because we felt the board was being nefarious, but because its the board's right to conduct some parts of its business in closed session, and the business at hand demanded a closed session.

It is the board's prerogative to do so. Any board of any organization, unless specifically prohibited by law, can and often should hold closed sessions. 

[FW]

No one is arguing against the concept of "closed sessions" (or, at least I hope not).  However, there must be open knowledge of important issues (like governance).  I also agree that the formulation of such solutions need to be done in closed sessions; um, that's why we have committies....  National Board meetings are to make decisions on recommendations; which should not be "classified".

I mean; who said the National Commander would be on salary?  I didn't. You should read those "bullet points" again.  It only says the National Commander should be "compensated".

One problem CAP has, IMHO, is understanding the difference between discussing vetted items in closed session and deciding on those issues; which should be done in the open. 
It also holds for "new business"  Do you all really think the CSU would be gone if the issue was properly placed in the agenda and vetted before voted on?

In any event, the National Board has made a clear and open decision on who will lead them.  We go from here and, wish all the best.

Don't worry about not remembering me, NIN, it was back in 1996.  Fifteen years is a long time to remember an introduction...

[RADIOMAN015]

The election is what it is, and likely will have little impact at what we do at the squadron level anyways.

BTW anyone know who was selected as the consultant for the CAP organization/governing study
RM     

[NIN]

Don't worry about not remembering me, NIN, it was back in 1996.  Fifteen years is a long time to remember an introduction...

I think you might have me confused with "my other brother Darryl." I didn't move to NER until 1998.

(And I thought my memory was really shot, which had me seriously considering a neurological exam for early onset Alzheimers)

[Briski]

Maintain some perspective, folks.  There's still a job to be done.  If you want to take your ball and go home, have at it.  But for me, I have a meeting tonight (and safety ed part to do), meeting on Friday night to do monthly safety ed at another squadron, O-rides on Saturday, and a Cope Spade on the horizon to think about.  I'm going to work on all that, and let this all wash over me.

This is easily one of the most important posts in this thread.

I think it bears rereading.

[Big_Ed]

 :clap:  I second that!

[Ned]

The election is what it is, and likely will have little impact at what we do at the squadron level anyways.

BTW anyone know who was selected as the consultant for the CAP organization/governing study
RM   

After a competative bidding process, Boardsource, Inc..

[Cindi]

Ned Lee did a great job as the Master of Ceremonies at the 2011 CAP National Banquet last night. I liked the joke about the National Commander arresting his day care charges. Job well done!

[bosshawk]

Besides being a very strong judge in the city of San Jose, Ned has a second career of being the Master of Ceremonies at CAP banquets.  He is very good at it, as I have attended six or eight of his banquet presentations.

[LGM30GMCC]

I don't know why the election of one candidate over another means the person who was not elected cannot still affect change toward some of what they were looking for. They may not have as strong a voice as they did, but they still have one.

There's more to getting changes made than being 'your Wing/CC's flunky' as someone put it.

Go to events, get to know people. Chat with them. A lot of the staffers at NHQ and the NB are in fact real people. (The NB members who want to run screaming from some of the meetings are no doubt truly human!)

If your ideas have merit, and are presented in a logical, respectful, and coherent manner people will at least consider them. As soon as you give the idea, try to unwed yourself from it though. Don't demand 'THAT'S MY IDEA, I SHOULD GET CREDIT' (Not directed toward anyone specifically, it truly is just general advice.) I am amazed by how many people I actually know when I went to the NB. I met them through NSC, IACE, Wing Events, NCSAs, and the ever powerful 'snarky comment about how watching the NB decide things can make me want to gouge my eyes out of my skull' which leads to the 'sit and eat lunch, share stories and later have a beer' method.

Overall, the majority of folks on the NB as far as I can tell just want to do what they feel is best for the organization. You don't have to talk to just yours, just get out there and meet people. Someone is going to agree with you.

As for some of the 'private session stuff' Some of it may simply be a matter of time. 'Hey we aren't getting this done, let's move it to later in the day which happens to be a closed meeting, but lets keep moving on some agenda items in the open as much as possible.' That's a perfectly legitimate reason to table. If you were paying attention to the safety thing, General Courter was getting frustrated that the proposal and amendments and whatnot were not easily displayed so everyone can read them. One advantage of tabling it was it gave time to get stuff set up to make sure everything was clear.

If you really want to watch people hash that kind of detail work out, more power to you. On a number of things I couldn't care much less and if they want to work out the details at one point or another, great.

[JC004]

It rarely and barely works, and it feeds the highly prevalent us vs. them of the members who would rather have nothing to do with national.

Members always talk about submitting things and they disappear like there is some giant black hole or giant shredder dedicated to the purpose.  People talk about it around units and activities, and people talk about it here.

Very little great things actually get up there - wherever there is.  People just give up because that's the way it goes.  CAP needs smart people and smart people don't waste resources like time and energy - they simply keep it local, it stays there, and it feeds us vs. them.

[SamFranklin]

Is there a thread that shows whether the various agenda items were passed or voted down? In other words, what happened at NB other than the elections?

[Eclipse]

I don't know why the election of one candidate over another means the person who was not elected cannot still affect change toward some of what they were looking for.

You're from Australia or Canada, right?

[adamblank]

I don't know why the election of one candidate over another means the person who was not elected cannot still affect change toward some of what they were looking for.

You're from Australia or Canada, right?

He is from the land of CAP getting stuff done USA.

[Майор Хаткевич]

There may be nothing to this, but these are the National Commanders since I joined:

Maj. Gen. Richard L. Bowling, CAP, Aug 2001-Aug 2004
Maj. Gen. Dwight H. Wheless, CAP, Aug 2004-Jul 2005
Maj. Gen. [HWSRN], CAP, Jul 2005-Oct 2007
Brig. Gen. Amy S. Courter, CAP, Oct 2007-Aug 2008
Maj. Gen. Amy S. Courter, CAP, Aug 2008–Aug 2011
Maj. Gen. Charles L. "Chuck" Carr Jr., CAP Aug 2011- Present

The only time I EVER heard of General Bowling or Wheless was in the CAP Newspaper. There was some chatter at the end.
HWSRN caused a LOT of local chatter. Since his term, it seems people have been paying a lot of attention to CAP National ANYTHING

[a2capt]

That pretty much sums it up for me, too. Same time frame of membership, too, though I will say that it started with Gen. Wheless in my case, because it seems like he was de-throned early due to possibly the next guy in line who caused the most chatter.