Rimpoche Kiama wrote:This last week has been difficult for all of us. We've learned some important lessons about how things work, and have begun to formulate a direction towards our eventual growth and the responsibilities we will be taking on.

As part of that process, Stryker Jenkins has tabled his resignation. In a committee meeting this afternoon (September 6, 2009) it was decided by a majority of the committee to accept this resignation. Stryker will be assuming the role as treasurer designate until a replacement can be found, at which time he will assist the treasurer elect until such time as his assistance is no longer deemed needed by the treasurer elect.

I do have a correction to make on the comments made by our chairman. I resigned my post because of the difficulties getting my thoughts across to some of the other committee members. NOT because I did not agree with the path taken to make Second Pride into something bigger and better.

I will remain on as Ambassador to the Second Pride community to help and assist the committee and our members. As well as to assist the new Treasurer to be elected.

To my undertanding, urgency is not the same for events chair less than 48h away from the main Festival and Treasurer when you have months ahead of you and someone who is actively working as a temporary substitute...

I must say I find this reasoning quite odd. However, you're right to do it quick and you can.. it's just the logic used..

Needless to say I beleive you realise you are taking upon yourself to make a decision that will involve ALL the money that the LGBT community will accept to give you, and that you will be responsible for... Not including more people in this important decision is your choice.

I've said before the Treasurer role is unlike any other, you must have 100% trust in that person. I myself have made a big donation and feel unconfortable seing things go the way they are going. For reasons I have communicated to you before and won't display here.

That's all for the record !

In a majority vote of the current 2010SP committee, EagleWoman Lightfoot has been elected to stand as the new Treasurer.

Congratulations Eagle!

Rimpoche Kiama wrote:In a majority vote of the current 2010SP committee, EagleWoman Lightfoot has been elected to stand as the new Treasurer.

Congratulations Eagle!

Congretulation Eagle... But ehmmmm... What where the vetoing results? Did All candidates address the committee? Why where groups like the Ambassadors or the general membership not included in this very important vote?

I have strong feelings about this issue. Please properly address this SP10 Committee

Dear Stryker,

This election was called as clearly stated in the charter as a special election to fill a chair that was vacanted by an individual (yourself) unable to fulfill their term. The charter, however, does not clearly define the term "special election" and as such, the committee in consultation with myself felt that precident needed to be set. In reflecting on past precedent, it was indeed seen that at other times, Presiding Chairs have made appointments based on need. I felt that an appointment by consensus of the elected committee would suffice.

Niether candidates were consulted, or had a chance to address the committee. Rather, it was left to each committee member to reflect on each applicants track record and contributions.

The vote at final count was EagleWoman as clear winner with 86% of the ballot, or 5 votes. Lemonodo Oh recieved one vote.

Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Anden Tolsen at your earliest convenience.

Thank you for your interest,

Rimpoche Kiama
SP10

Last edited by Rimpoche Kiama on Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:52 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : typo, typo, typo.)

General Voting
Voting rights are primarily given to the elected Second Pride Committee members, as to make voting process go faster than by bringing in a large group of people.

The Second Pride Committee may ask or have agreements with Second Pride Ambassadors to participate also in general votes.

The Second Pride Committee may also ask registered voters among the general group to participate in votes.

When a vote of the Second Pride Committee is contested, the concerned party has 15 days since the vote to gather a minimum of 10 supporters within registered voters or Ambassadors, make a counter proposal and re-open the vote. Supporters within the registered voters must have registered themselves as voters at least 7 days prior to when the original vote has been contested to avoid abuse.

Candidate Lemonodo Oh wishes to contest the recent flawed vote for Treasurer in free, open and fair election based on candidates knowing who opposes them, their campaign statements followed by your intelligent questions and the answers provided. Many substantial concerns were raised over financial accountability in the transition from 2009 - 2010 that will persist without your support for re-vote. Second Pride Committee can safely go forward only with a full vote for Treasurer, because it is the only way you can have a representative on the Committee who demonstrates the capacity to respond to your concerns. Please support this important bid for for re-vote by immediately responding below and simply saying, for example, "Yes, I am in favor of this Counter Proposal. Please conduct Re-Vote for Treasurer." Thank you.

I agree with the contest made by 1 of the candidates for the post of treasurer.
I also like this done in a more public manor. Treasurer is an imported position in an organization like ours that is on the move to becoming something greater.

All the candidates must have the opportunity to state there case to the committee / voters. Else it looks like an vote for "who's your favorite" rather then "who's the best candidate".

Last edited by stryker jenkins on Tue Sep 08, 2009 7:06 pm; edited 1 time in total

I have to agree with Mr. Preminger, that "emergent" is not months away from PRIDE. Yes it is Very important that a replacement be had as soon as it is doable. Mr. Jenkins, did not leave PRIDE or his position from what I read, and had said he would sit it until a person was found to replace him. That doesn't make this emergent a situation. I believe Mr. Oh and Ms. Lightfoot seem both very good choices and appropriate persons to sit this Chair. As I read the charter though, in this case, there should have been/should be a regular election process with all groups present. Yes it needs to be done ASAP. I am not happy with what feels 'secretive' and select about such an important process and position. No disrespect or lack of confidence in either candidate is ment in my saying this. Charter and protocol are in place in any group for a reason, no? I believe from what I read, the Ambassador's are ment to be part of this sort of election. Forgive me if I am wrong here. In any case if this stands as it is that Ms. Lightfoot is Treasurer, Congratulations. Congratulations to both Candidates on being very good choices for this position. Their reputations have come to me as impeccible. That is a fortunate thing for PRIDE in either case.

**"[ An Ambassador ]...Acts as the official voters group when the election of a new presiding chairperson takes place, in conjunction with the outgoing Committee." I take this to mean in any election where Chairs are changing hands. Should be defined better in any case to be all inclusive of what this means exactly. Stryker is outgoing committee by his choice...so to my mind Ambassador's should be in on this as if it were a normal election of chair positions...that is its one chair doesn't change that.

[quote="Rimpoche Kiama"]
Dear Friends,
We've learned some important lessons about how things work, and have begun to formulate a direction towards our eventual growth and the responsibilities we will be taking on.

**One would hope by now, that there has been more than a formulation of direction and that the responsibilites are taken on not just begun to be? The committee has been seated for a long while now and I hope that it is farther along in this than implied here? - Wolf

Much appreciation for rapid endorsement and articulate expression of staff support so far!

1. It is possible people will interpret this Counter Proposal to Conduct a Re-Vote for Treasurer as not being my idea. It is mine alone. If anything, it goes against wise counsel I've sought out on my own. Be happy with the election outcome, and avoid drama, was the specific advice. Here is my idea. The Treasurer, regardless of who wins, must respond to all substantive issues raised in campaign, and it is clearly documented above that the Committee did not allow this to happen. All voices must be heard. This misstep can easily be fixed by endorsing this Counter Proposal to Conduct a Re-Vote for Treasurer below.
   
   
2. I informed EagleWoman of my intent to run. She said, "Why are you telling me this Lemon." She never informed me of her candidacy, and I had no idea I had spoken directly with my opposition until the information given above by the Presiding Chair was posted. I was blindsided by this news. I regret, if there is further misunderstanding of my honorable intent, that recovery from the shock of this flawed vote has been less than instantaneous. I think it is the right thing to do, to write this Counter Proposal to Conduct a Re-Vote for Treasurer, and on acceptance of this proposal, for Second Pride to actually hold open, free and fair elections for Treasurer.
   

I am surprised Committee didn't inform both candidates of who was running as is done in any election. I have to agree w Mr. Oh on this that things need to be relooked at and redone.

honestly Lemon, that statement is a bit out of context however....I was NOT a "candidate" at that time. I hope that straightens that out.
As for the rest of all this, I will simply state the following, I will abide by whatever decision is reached by the process for which the Charter provides.

WolfsMoon_Southpaw wrote:I am surprised Committee didn't inform both candidates of who was running as is done in any election. I have to agree w Mr. Oh on this that things need to be relooked at and redone.

Wolf, for an avatar that has been in Second Life for 12 days, and who joined Second Pride her second day, you sure are a quick study on Second Pride and, even more important, on trying to find ways to derail it.

I cannot tolerate ex-Pride members returning to spread sedition and push their own personal agenda, wearing sheep's clothing. Wolf, you joined the Events committee once in your old avatar, and now you join it again, thinking this kind of duplicity will be tolerated. Not only is it dishonest, but it shows a total disregard for a genuine discussion taking place on this forum. You could care less on the process or how the election was held, just so long as you can further your own little vendetta, which is very sad.

I suggest you pack your bags and get out of town before the sheriff returns.

Cheers,

Marcus

WolfsMoon_Southpaw wrote:I am surprised Committee didn't inform both candidates of who was running as is done in any election. I have to agree w Mr. Oh on this that things need to be relooked at and redone.

While we respect your right and privilege to voice your opinion and observations on this forum regarding this issue, WolfsMoon, I feel it is my duty and responsibility as Membership Representative to point out to you that the Charter provides that endorsement of the contested vote must come from "within registered voters or Ambassadors."

When a vote of the Second Pride Committee is contested, the concerned party has 15 days since the vote to gather a minimum of 10 supporters within registered voters or Ambassadors, make a counter proposal and re-open the vote. Supporters within the registered voters must have registered themselves as voters at least 7 days prior to when the original vote has been contested to avoid abuse.

You are neither a registered voter nor an Ambassador so unfortunately your endorsement of the this Counter Proposal to conduct a re-vote for the Treasurer position cannot be counted among the ten required for a successful call for revote.

However, you may rest assured that your opinion and observations are noted and that the 2010 Second Pride Committee, indeed Second Pride itself, respects your right and privilege of freedom of speech.

Respectfully,
Keo

Hello,
I would have to agree with Lemo and Zack both in this instance. As I re-read the Charter it is not an emergency where someone has quit PRIDE or taken ill. It also isn't weeks or days before PRIDE. I think what Lemo proposes sounds fair and sound. I am equally fine with either Eagle or Lemo as Treasurer but things should go by Charter in this as well as anything else going on. So this is my formal second as an interested party and member to Lemo's call. Its just an opinion. Thanks.

I have to address Marcus Steeplechases fury here. Nothing I read about Wolfmoon's question or statement indicates a 'quick study' or old member. I think that anyone reading this stuff who can, and who bothers to talk to other members could come to a like opinion. I see nothing about what was said as trying to 'derail' anyone or anything and a new member might not get the whole of when they can second anything or not. Id say she is owed an apology for being accused and assumed about and jumped on here. I can think of a few people who might try to derail things who are not even looked at much in my memory of things and all I have read here going on between people today that is public Too read, I don't see hers as negative, inflamatory or out to harm anyone. This is a public forum and all PRIDE voices are welcome or are suppose to be Marcus. Suggesting someone pack their bags and leave is rude and uncalled for. Even if she is someone from the past that isnt illegal or a crime and many many in SL have alts and do fine things with them. Fresh start...etc.. That's my two cents and probably unwelcome but there it is.
Madison

I wish to add myself to the people that Lemonodo Oh needs in support of his counter-proposal.

I believe this brings the required number to 2/10.

Thank you.

MadisonRutledge wrote:Hello, I have to address Marcus Steeplechases fury here. Nothing I read about Wolfmoon's question or statement indicates a 'quick study' or old member. I think that anyone reading this stuff who can, and who bothers to talk to other members could come to a like opinion. I see nothing about what was said as trying to 'derail' anyone or anything and a new member might not get the whole of when they can second anything or not. Id say she is owed an apology for being accused and assumed about and jumped on here. I can think of a few people who might try to derail things who are not even looked at much in my memory of things and all I have read here going on between people today that is public Too read, I don't see hers as negative, inflamatory or out to harm anyone. This is a public forum and all PRIDE voices are welcome or are suppose to be Marcus. Suggesting someone pack their bags and leave is rude and uncalled for. Even if she is someone from the past that isnt illegal or a crime and many many in SL have alts and do fine things with them. Fresh start...etc.. That's my two cents and probably unwelcome but there it is.
Madison

Dear Wolfsmoon,

If you are reading this, I want you to accept my apology, as Madison suggests. It was unkind of me to assume you were an alt of another member of Second Pride. It just seemed a bit odd that you had so much information about the committee and the charter, since you had only been in SL for a few days. It took me weeks, but then again I'm not the brightest crayon in the box.

Wolfsmoon, I have always prided myself as a person with integrity. But like all of us, I can get caught up in my own notions of fair play. I am sorry I accused you of dishonesty or game-playing, especially since I have no proof you are an avatar circulating through Second Pride with a new identity.

I think it's time for me to roll up my sleeves and get back to work with Events, since I have made a complete fool of myself in this public forum. Once again, Wolfsmoon, I am sorry I asked you to pack your bags and leave Dodge City.

WolfsMoon_Southpaw wrote:

Rimpoche Kiama wrote:
Dear Friends,
We've learned some important lessons about how things work, and have begun to formulate a direction towards our eventual growth and the responsibilities we will be taking on.

**One would hope by now, that there has been more than a formulation of direction and that the responsibilites are taken on not just begun to be? The committee has been seated for a long while now and I hope that it is farther along in this than implied here? - Wolf

Ahh, finally found this!

Sorry, Wolfsmoon, but this is what had set my "fury" off earlier today. Of course, as a new member of Second Pride you could not have known that this year's committee is, in fact, further along than what was implied. In August we held a grand 2-day event, entitled Teahouse of the August Moon. By all accounts it was a big success, and in the process we raised nearly 200K for Amnesty International while doubling our membership.

In a few short weeks, we are holding an Art Walk, to celebrate the contributions of many LGBT artists in SL. This three-sim event is bringing out the talent and ingenuity of the arts community, and this is very exciting.

For the Festival itself, booking forms are either online, or about to go online, that will direct people to everything from "How to hold a SP Fundraiser" to "Book a float in the SP10 Parade".

I guess it's because the committee has accomplished so much in the past two months, I got a bit sensitive about the perception we were just sitting on our duffs. But as a new member to Second Pride, you couldn't have possibly realized this, so once again I must apologize for my unkind remarks earlier about your "duplicity".

After reading through the previous statements and replies I believe this situation can hurt Pride if it continues without a general accepted conclusion esp. when it deals with the Chair that holds all responsibility for any money collected.

Both candidates seem worthy, honest and hardworking ... this is not a reflection on them.

Since the Charter is not explicit in how the election should be handled the current Chairman and Committee did have the right to hold the election in almost any manner they wished. There is no parliamentary fault there. Fault is in the flawed Charter.
I believe the section of the Charter sited by Lemonado refers to a situation where a wider rigged election has taken place and the candidate with the majority of votes was denied their Chair. That is not the case here.
The Committee and Chairman decided to hold a speedy private election. No one has put forth that the count reported by the Chairman is incorrect or tampered with.

But one of the candidates believes he was not given a fair chance to run for the seat.

Lemonado I understand and am sympathetic to your frustration on how the election was handled but I can not support your use of that section of the Charter as reason for a new election.

That being said .... considering the mess of public bad blood inflicted on Pride over the last month, nonsense swirling around this Chair and the many months ahead (upcoming events aside) until Pride I do not agree with one of the Chairman's reasons for haste in filling the Treasurer's position. A week for the candidates to make public declarations and hold a wider membership election would not have hurt. On the contrary it would have avoided the continuation of this sad situation and hushed the criticism of this very hard working, energetic and creative current group of Chairs.

I respectfully remind the Chairman, that even if it is the Chairman's right to frame this particular election as he sees fit, he does have an obligation to make sure that the Elections are and are viewed as transparent and honest.
A member in good standing rightly feels he was not informed how the election was to be handled nor feels he was fairly treated by the standing Committee. That makes the Standing Committee's current choice deal with all this bad will and suspicion. And that reflects poorly on Pride.

If you were to hold a another general election for the post, let the candidates declare their intentions and let the wider Pride membership vote you will garner much good will and a stronger Pride. Please consider it.

Thank you for your time
Capabilitytodd Elswit
Building Chair SP '08

Cap,

Thanks for your level-headed, common sense post. I think the committee can agree to this format, and will address this at the soonest possibility.

Fellow Ambassadors, Committee and Members,

I have so far stayed out of many of the debates running over the past few weeks and have only posted when I have felt it absolutely necessary to do so.

This is one of these occasions that I feel it necessary to give my two cents worth !

Firstly I must agree with Zack as to the need for an expedited vote in this important chair position since Stryker continued to oversee the position until a suitable replacement was found. The committee decided that since they felt the need was immediate to find a replacement to hold a committee only vote and as per the charter I see no reason to hold this against them – however what I do find contemptible is the manner in which this was carried out.

I strenuously object to the fact that neither candidate was advised that they were standing against another or had the chance to address the committee.

It has been stated that each committee member was left to reflect on each applicants track record and contribution…..how any of you can be aware of either candidates track record would be good to know. ( I exclude in that sentence the work carried out by EagleWoman Lightfoot which I am sure has been good while co-chair of the Events Committee since Lemondo has not held a position with the current committee, I cannot see how any comparison could be reached). I ask you…would anyone on the committee vote from a mayor / governor / Candidate for Congress or Member of Parliament based solely upon their personal views and not knowing what the candidates have in store once elected or the ability to actually carry out the needs of the position ?

When I was asked in 2008 to apply for the position of Secretary, even though I could have just been appointed by the committee I was asked to stand before the full membership and put forward my reasons for applying for the position and no one was even running against me ! The membership had the opportunity to say aye or nay based upon what they heard .I was given the opportunity to put my case forward and feel that both candidates should have been given the right to do the same be it before the committee or the full eligible voters.

It has been stated that this vote was taken on past precedent – let me advise that at no time was an appointment to any chair made without a candidate putting forward their credentials.

The Charter has been cited in the thread here and clearly it needs to be defined in certain areas….however I must state my support for Lemonondo to contest the vote since there is no clear “reason” under which he can invoke the contestation, it is his right to re-open the vote under his counter proposal.

As my fellow Ambasador has stated:

I do not agree with one of the Chairman's reasons for haste in filling the Treasurer's position. A week for the candidates to make public declarations and hold a wider membership election would not have hurt. On the contrary it would have avoided the continuation of this sad situation and hushed the criticism of this very hard working, energetic and creative current group of Chairs.

I respectfully remind the Chairman, that even if it is the Chairman's right to frame this particular election as he sees fit, he does have an obligation to make sure that the Elections are and are viewed as transparent and honest.
A member in good standing rightly feels he was not informed how the election was to be handled nor feels he was fairly treated by the standing Committee. That makes the Standing Committee's current choice deal with all this bad will and suspicion. And that reflects poorly on Pride.

Thank you,
Danny.

Hi everyone,

I wish to contribute too, to the people that Lemonodo Oh needs for his counter-proposal.

Counting Danniel (4 out of 10) ?

Thank you

I also wish to be counted as supporting Lemo's counter-proposal, I believe that makes 6/10

On a more personal note I'd like to express my sadness at seeing Strker leave his position under ANY circumstance - but to have had it happen as it appears to (from what i have read here on the SP.com site) is a disgrace.
Different personalities is not a detriment, it is an asset.
The loss of Stryker Jenkins as treasurer is a loss to Second Pride and to all of us.

That being said, again I reitterate - I support Lemo's counter-proposal

It's obviously clear that there is enough of a need for the membership to participate.

Therefore in the interest of fairness, elections will be held for this position. I will alert the membership chair and the secretary to the need and initiate proceedings immediately. The voting will take place two weeks from today. Candidates will have the opportunity to make their cases and be able to present themselves during the two week period.

Should you have any further questions, please contact Anden Tolsen.

Thank you for your interest, and thank you so much for contacting me personally to present your opinions. I'm proud to know we have so many outstanding courageous people in this organization!

Rimpoche Kiama
SP2010

Last edited by Rimpoche Kiama on Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:25 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : topic change)