Reports
144 views
Skip to first unread message
Bruce Weary
Mar 4, 2015, 8:02:54 AM3/4/15
to ride...@endurance.net
This, from Mike Maul--
In response to Eric's earlier post about a lack of knowledge of what the BoD list is discussing - Steph Teeter, Skip Kemerer, and Mike Maul (all
BoD members)- will provide bimonthly summaries of the topics discussed
on the BoD list in the prior 2 weeks.
It's a listing of topics discussed only - no names or actions - so the
membership is aware of what we are discussing. Names and actions come in the minutes from the conference calls when we can actually pass motions. We can't pass motions on the email list - just discuss them.
Minutes of the BoD conference calls are available online at
http://aerc.org/M_C_MinutesArchived.aspx
back to 1975(Courtesy of John Teeter/Bob Morris).
Minutes will lag the call by about 1-2 months because they have to be
written up, posted/amended/approved at the next call.
Skip is doing the first one March 1-15, Steph the March 15 - end of
month, and I'll do the next one.
When you see the first one - please give us your feedback on whether
it's meeting your needs.
Mike
Kelly Ahearn-Wagner
Mar 4, 2015, 9:51:40 AM3/4/15
to ride...@endurance.net
This is good news for the membership. I routinely read the minutes, but always wondered how to find out about the upcoming topics to be discussed. Sometimes when I rode with someone connected to the board, they would tell me what issues were being considered, but I thought this was confidential. I don't know much about committees and boards and was happy to learn from this discussion on RC that the issues are not supposed to be kept secret from us.
stephanie teeter
Mar 4, 2015, 11:10:23 AM3/4/15
to Ridecamp Teeter
A little history - why the AERC board seems so secretive:
In 1995 my (smart and visionary technologist) husband John encouraged me to start a webpage for Endurance. The internet was just developing. So I procured the domain www.Endurance.Net, learned how to write html code, and started a little webpage. Started with pictures, and links to other information sites out there. At the time Endurance.Net was one of the first 1000 websites! John also showed me how to start an email listserve - so endu...@moscow.com was born (John started an ISP in Moscow, Idaho so we had that domain already). And later changed to ride...@endurance.net.
The next step was AERC - I went to a board meeting in Reno (1996) and handed out folders with info on the web and internet to all the board members. I think Dane Frazier was president at that time. The board approved my informal proposal 'Let's Get Wired!' , so I procured www.AERC.org and started an email list for the board members. I built the first AERC.org website - basically listing contact info, board members, committees, etc - news, HOF stuff, photos.
Well... after a couple years the 'privacy' battles began with the AERC email list. The AERC leadership insisted that emails sent to the list should be private, not to be shared or forwarded to non-board members. It sort of became a battle. At that time most email address where shared by spouses so the idea that emails should/could be private was a bit of a joke. So 'private' posts were leaking out, John and I were insisting that it was both ludicrous and against the fundamentals of a non-profit business to be conducting business behind closed doors. (we weren't technically conducting business, but discussions and persuasions were occurring and opinions were being formed without benefit of membership feedback).
I was in the hot seat on the board at that time, butting heads with a few board members and trying to build up Endurance.Net while maintaining AERC.org. Mike Maul started helping out with AERC.org, Russ Humphrey (Microsoft programmer) got involved and we started the horse/rider database. I was under attack for building up Endurance.Net (and undermining AERC.org - was the claim) and at this point the AERC email list posts were getting nastier and more aggressive. The nastier the posts got, the more insistent some were on having it remain private, out of the view of the membership.
Board members insisted that they didn't want to have to defend their views against internet riff-raff. (Ride...@endurance.net was growing, and folks were becoming more 'vocal' ) . I insisted that the posts and dialog on the aerc board list were becoming more accusatory and outrageous, as a result of being 'private'. And the board members were starting to function in a 'bubble'.
Eventually the AERC board list went from our private server, to the Yahoo groups. I stopped working on the aerc.org page and handed it all over to Mike. I became very unhappy on the board, under constant attack from one particular member, the board became more polarized as the battle escalated - the battleground was almost exclusively on the AERC board email list. I truly believe this wouldn't have happened if the posts that board members made on the list had been available for viewing by the membership.
Somehow this became the standard, the culture for how the AERC board functioned. How it still functions. All issues are discussed in the privacy of the email list. (and there are also private committee lists). It could have been very different if from the beginning we used the technology in a more open way - involving membership dialog instead of excluding it. I'm back on the board again, and resigned to being 'good' and following the policy of a private email list. But I've also witnessed the same things happening - private accusations, attacks, negative and nasty posts. Same same. The phone conference meetings and face to face meeting are mostly civil and polite, but the email discussions get nasty and heated, and have destructive consequences.
After one particularly nasty exchange of emails, one board member said 'so now aren't you glad that the list is private?' ... well , actually no, - it wouldn't have gotten so nasty if people knew that others could know what they'd written.
So I'm writing this 'essay' in response to Kelly's comment. It is so very wrong (IMO) that AERC members have this impression of how their organization works!!! It didn't have to be that way - doesn't have to be that way - if the board would accept a more inclusive policy. I don't know how to convince other board members of this... but I'll keep trying! This bi-monthly report of what the board is discussing vie email will certainly help.
Steph
(sorry - that got a little long!)
In 1995 my (smart and visionary technologist) husband John encouraged me to start a webpage for Endurance. The internet was just developing. So I procured the domain www.Endurance.Net, learned how to write html code, and started a little webpage. Started with pictures, and links to other information sites out there. At the time Endurance.Net was one of the first 1000 websites! John also showed me how to start an email listserve - so endu...@moscow.com was born (John started an ISP in Moscow, Idaho so we had that domain already). And later changed to ride...@endurance.net.
The next step was AERC - I went to a board meeting in Reno (1996) and handed out folders with info on the web and internet to all the board members. I think Dane Frazier was president at that time. The board approved my informal proposal 'Let's Get Wired!' , so I procured www.AERC.org and started an email list for the board members. I built the first AERC.org website - basically listing contact info, board members, committees, etc - news, HOF stuff, photos.
Well... after a couple years the 'privacy' battles began with the AERC email list. The AERC leadership insisted that emails sent to the list should be private, not to be shared or forwarded to non-board members. It sort of became a battle. At that time most email address where shared by spouses so the idea that emails should/could be private was a bit of a joke. So 'private' posts were leaking out, John and I were insisting that it was both ludicrous and against the fundamentals of a non-profit business to be conducting business behind closed doors. (we weren't technically conducting business, but discussions and persuasions were occurring and opinions were being formed without benefit of membership feedback).
I was in the hot seat on the board at that time, butting heads with a few board members and trying to build up Endurance.Net while maintaining AERC.org. Mike Maul started helping out with AERC.org, Russ Humphrey (Microsoft programmer) got involved and we started the horse/rider database. I was under attack for building up Endurance.Net (and undermining AERC.org - was the claim) and at this point the AERC email list posts were getting nastier and more aggressive. The nastier the posts got, the more insistent some were on having it remain private, out of the view of the membership.
Board members insisted that they didn't want to have to defend their views against internet riff-raff. (Ride...@endurance.net was growing, and folks were becoming more 'vocal' ) . I insisted that the posts and dialog on the aerc board list were becoming more accusatory and outrageous, as a result of being 'private'. And the board members were starting to function in a 'bubble'.
Eventually the AERC board list went from our private server, to the Yahoo groups. I stopped working on the aerc.org page and handed it all over to Mike. I became very unhappy on the board, under constant attack from one particular member, the board became more polarized as the battle escalated - the battleground was almost exclusively on the AERC board email list. I truly believe this wouldn't have happened if the posts that board members made on the list had been available for viewing by the membership.
Somehow this became the standard, the culture for how the AERC board functioned. How it still functions. All issues are discussed in the privacy of the email list. (and there are also private committee lists). It could have been very different if from the beginning we used the technology in a more open way - involving membership dialog instead of excluding it. I'm back on the board again, and resigned to being 'good' and following the policy of a private email list. But I've also witnessed the same things happening - private accusations, attacks, negative and nasty posts. Same same. The phone conference meetings and face to face meeting are mostly civil and polite, but the email discussions get nasty and heated, and have destructive consequences.
After one particularly nasty exchange of emails, one board member said 'so now aren't you glad that the list is private?' ... well , actually no, - it wouldn't have gotten so nasty if people knew that others could know what they'd written.
So I'm writing this 'essay' in response to Kelly's comment. It is so very wrong (IMO) that AERC members have this impression of how their organization works!!! It didn't have to be that way - doesn't have to be that way - if the board would accept a more inclusive policy. I don't know how to convince other board members of this... but I'll keep trying! This bi-monthly report of what the board is discussing vie email will certainly help.
Steph
(sorry - that got a little long!)
Carla Richardson
Mar 4, 2015, 11:51:13 AM3/4/15
to ride...@endurance.net
Thank you, Steph, you and John, for starting up the aerc.org website and endurance.net website, and Ridecamp.
I agree, if the discussions had always been public, things would be a lot more civil and courteous, probably a lot more productive.
Carla Richardson
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecamp+u...@endurance.net.
Susan Garlinghouse
Mar 4, 2015, 12:08:39 PM3/4/15
to st...@endurance.net, Ridecamp Teeter
It seems that I do most of these posts defending the BoD sitting in airports coincidentally doing things for AERC for which I (nor any other directors) get paid, or often even expenses reimbursed. But here we go again.
While I don't dispute Steph's history of how email discussion groups evolved in regards to the AERC lists, please note that Steph's opinion as to the inadvisability of it remaining private is just that---Steph's personal opinion, which I don't happen to agree with.
In saying so, it is NOT because I have any problem whatsoever in saying publicly what I post privately on the bodlist. In the specific example that Steph cites which garnered a response, "aren't you glad this list is private", it was in direct response to several emails I had posted which objected mightily to another Director's poor sportsmanship and equine welfare, to which I had been witness. Yes, it certainly got very heated, not that I back down from or regret a single word of what I said at the time or since then. Nor would I have worded it one bit differently had it been public. NOT. ONE. WORD. And---Steph---if you would like to obtain permission from the director to whom I directed my remarks, and you know perfectly well who that is, I would be more than happy to re-post my comments here on Ridecamp and fully defend every last word I said. I don't say things I don't mean and I couldn't care less who else sees them.
As far why the Bod minutes don't include detailed discussions of every agenda item, it's because we try to follow Robert's Rules of Order. As such, the minutes reflect what we did (ie, passed a motion) but not the discussion that led to that decision. I don't care if discussions were otherwise disseminated, but it's wouldn't be following RR if we did it that way.
As for why most bod members don't spend their entire life on the discussion forums, especially this one, it's mostly a time management choice for them (certainly for me) and, for want of a better term, because it exceeds the bullsh*t-to-benefit ratio to spend hours and hours repeating ourselves, often re-answering questions that have been asked and answered before, and usually asked in pretty ugly ways. It's considered standard and popular procedure on this forum to suggest the BoD are a bunch of inept, basically nice but probably corrupt, certainly pretty dim individuals lacking either cojones or huevos, depending on your preferences. A good number of those opinions come from people that aren't AERC members, or continuously threaten to resign their membership based on whether or not the BoD meets their personal criteria, or from people who would endlessly argue and pick apart a casual statement that a ham sandwich for lunch might be nice, just because they can. All while defending their position that their personal lives, finances or ride schedule doesn't allow them to participate directly, it's perfectly okay to attack those of us that have set aside huge amounts of time, finances and resources for no other reason than to try and provide tangible assistance to the sport we love.
It's also worth noting that if AERC leapt into action in the ways suggested here (and I'm referring specifically to the FEI G7 issue), it might not turn out the way everyone wants. There WOULD be repercussions, both to current members, international or not, to the organization in ways we may not like, and potentially legal ones that we REALLY won't like. I can guaran-damn-tee that if we roared straight ahead to adequately demonstrate the presence of testicles, and things went south, then the same people online calling the BoD some pretty ugly names would continue to do so, just this time in evaluating our lack of forethought, vision and basic intelligence. Right. That sounds like an awesome plan. Let's do that instead of try and carefully explore all the pathways that will do the most good for horses without doing harm to our own riders and members.
Can the Bod do better trying to appraise members of what's going on, yup. Working on it, but try not to call us all a bunch of corrupt morons in the interim, shall we?
That's enough for now, mostly because my flight is about to board on my way to convention. Let the flames and ongoing abuse begin, and I can pretty much predict which individuals will be at the forefront of baying for blood while not getting into the deep end of the pool themselves. Don't be surprised if I don't take much time to answer, as I have three BoD meetings to participate, four committee meetings, four seminars to teach and a crapload of work to get edited and finished up for AERC. None of which I'll get paid, or even reimbursed for, none of which would be as much fun as skipping all of it to just go ride my horse, and at least on this forum, none of which I or any of the other directors will likely even be thanked for.
But don't let any of that stop you.
Susan Garlinghouse, DVM
Director at Large
Education Committee Chair
Sent from my iPad
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
While I don't dispute Steph's history of how email discussion groups evolved in regards to the AERC lists, please note that Steph's opinion as to the inadvisability of it remaining private is just that---Steph's personal opinion, which I don't happen to agree with.
In saying so, it is NOT because I have any problem whatsoever in saying publicly what I post privately on the bodlist. In the specific example that Steph cites which garnered a response, "aren't you glad this list is private", it was in direct response to several emails I had posted which objected mightily to another Director's poor sportsmanship and equine welfare, to which I had been witness. Yes, it certainly got very heated, not that I back down from or regret a single word of what I said at the time or since then. Nor would I have worded it one bit differently had it been public. NOT. ONE. WORD. And---Steph---if you would like to obtain permission from the director to whom I directed my remarks, and you know perfectly well who that is, I would be more than happy to re-post my comments here on Ridecamp and fully defend every last word I said. I don't say things I don't mean and I couldn't care less who else sees them.
As far why the Bod minutes don't include detailed discussions of every agenda item, it's because we try to follow Robert's Rules of Order. As such, the minutes reflect what we did (ie, passed a motion) but not the discussion that led to that decision. I don't care if discussions were otherwise disseminated, but it's wouldn't be following RR if we did it that way.
As for why most bod members don't spend their entire life on the discussion forums, especially this one, it's mostly a time management choice for them (certainly for me) and, for want of a better term, because it exceeds the bullsh*t-to-benefit ratio to spend hours and hours repeating ourselves, often re-answering questions that have been asked and answered before, and usually asked in pretty ugly ways. It's considered standard and popular procedure on this forum to suggest the BoD are a bunch of inept, basically nice but probably corrupt, certainly pretty dim individuals lacking either cojones or huevos, depending on your preferences. A good number of those opinions come from people that aren't AERC members, or continuously threaten to resign their membership based on whether or not the BoD meets their personal criteria, or from people who would endlessly argue and pick apart a casual statement that a ham sandwich for lunch might be nice, just because they can. All while defending their position that their personal lives, finances or ride schedule doesn't allow them to participate directly, it's perfectly okay to attack those of us that have set aside huge amounts of time, finances and resources for no other reason than to try and provide tangible assistance to the sport we love.
It's also worth noting that if AERC leapt into action in the ways suggested here (and I'm referring specifically to the FEI G7 issue), it might not turn out the way everyone wants. There WOULD be repercussions, both to current members, international or not, to the organization in ways we may not like, and potentially legal ones that we REALLY won't like. I can guaran-damn-tee that if we roared straight ahead to adequately demonstrate the presence of testicles, and things went south, then the same people online calling the BoD some pretty ugly names would continue to do so, just this time in evaluating our lack of forethought, vision and basic intelligence. Right. That sounds like an awesome plan. Let's do that instead of try and carefully explore all the pathways that will do the most good for horses without doing harm to our own riders and members.
Can the Bod do better trying to appraise members of what's going on, yup. Working on it, but try not to call us all a bunch of corrupt morons in the interim, shall we?
That's enough for now, mostly because my flight is about to board on my way to convention. Let the flames and ongoing abuse begin, and I can pretty much predict which individuals will be at the forefront of baying for blood while not getting into the deep end of the pool themselves. Don't be surprised if I don't take much time to answer, as I have three BoD meetings to participate, four committee meetings, four seminars to teach and a crapload of work to get edited and finished up for AERC. None of which I'll get paid, or even reimbursed for, none of which would be as much fun as skipping all of it to just go ride my horse, and at least on this forum, none of which I or any of the other directors will likely even be thanked for.
But don't let any of that stop you.
Susan Garlinghouse, DVM
Director at Large
Education Committee Chair
Sent from my iPad
> --
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
>
> To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
>
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecamp+u...@endurance.net.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
>
> To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
>
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecamp+u...@endurance.net.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Joe Long
Mar 4, 2015, 12:26:30 PM3/4/15
to st...@endurance.net, Ridecamp Teeter
A little history - why the AERC board seems so secretive:
...
So I'm writing this 'essay' in response to Kelly's comment. It is so very wrong (IMO) that AERC members have this impression of how their organization works!!! It didn't have to be that way - doesn't have to be that way - if the board would accept a more inclusive policy. I don't know how to convince other board members of this... but I'll keep trying! This bi-monthly report of what the board is discussing vie email will certainly help.
BRAVO!!!!! You have hit that nail right on its head. I believe the decision to keep the Board mail list and Committee mail lists private is the worst, or nearly the worst, decision in the history of the AERC. If someone were to bring a lawsuit I do not believe it would stand up in court due to California's laws on open meetings for nonprofit boards. AIUI the only time the Board is allowed to have deliberations in secret is for personnel matters (such as disciplining or firing an employee). Members cannot be excluded from listening to all that is said at Board meetings, it is just as wrong to exclude them from reading what is written on the mail lists. Keeping those discussions hidden is a BIG driver of the concerns about secrecy and lack of transparency of our Board.
I fought the good fight for those lists being open for AERC members to read (not send to), with no success. I had a Board member tell me that her emails were her property and she didn't want them read by non-board members. I informed her that she was wrong, that all emails sent to an official AERC list are the property of the AERC, not the person sending them, but she wouldn't believe that. It certainly made we wonder what she thought she had to hide.
This is something that can still be corrected, by opening the lists read-only to at least the current members of AERC if not the world. That is not only the right and ethical thing to do, and probably required by California law, it would as you say have very beneficial effects. By dropping the secrecy not only would discussions on those lists become more civil, not only would those members who are interested be better informed, but the aura of secrecy that has grown up would dissipate.
One thing that would need to be avoided would be setting up clandestine lists by some members of the Board or committees to avoid the openness of the official list. This should be strictly prohibited with penalties for doing it including up to removal from the Board. Nothing can prevent a group from emailing each other directly with multiple addressees, just as a group can get together in the hall during a break and talk privately, but the setting up of clandestine lists should be opposed.
Please, Directors, let's bring our AERC governance back into the sunshine.
Lisa Salas
Mar 4, 2015, 12:28:38 PM3/4/15
to ridecamp at Endurance.Net
You mean to say, that there is or was someone who worked for Microsoft on the board, and there is no "live streaming", audio or visual available for board meetings? On your site, I can click on so many links on endurance.net, like Karen Chaton, (I think that is who it is) who has a radio show, and no member has access to board meetings????? Which, by the way should be available for every paying member.
I don't even know what to say to that.
I will say I am so proud of you Steph. I had no idea.
Lisa Salas, the oddfarm
Carla Richardson
Mar 4, 2015, 1:04:35 PM3/4/15
to ride...@endurance.net
Thank you, Susan, I always love your posts. I wish you would be a little more forthcoming on how you really stand, though, because your lack of clearly stating just how you feel is just so off-putting. Ow! Oh my tongue hurts from being so far into my cheek!
Thank you for serving on the AERC board, you know that I appreciate you from the ground to the sky and back again. I know how hard the board works, and how agonizing it is to make clear and satisfactory decisions. It's best to not be hasty...
Carla Richardson
stephanie teeter
Mar 4, 2015, 1:52:31 PM3/4/15
to Ridecamp Teeter
Actually the MS guy Russ wasn't on the board. He volunteered a lot of time building the system, which AERC eventually bought. But it wasn't a 'for hire' venture. Just to remind you guys that most of the stuff that happens for AERC happens because of volunteer efforts, or board members taking a turn at really stepping up their efforts and time spent. Board members, ride managers, trail advocates, committee chairs, all these folks work together to keep AERC progressing. Some of the seemingly vocal detractors (Truman and Joe come to mind :) have also spent many hours in the past working for AERC and endurance riding. We're all in this together!
I actually don't mind the assaults on our juevos... I think it's good for an organization to consider all angles, even if repeatedly and vociferously :)
For AERC to have live video streaming of meetings, we either have to spend a fair amount of money on technology and know-how, or have some 'regular' member volunteer to help us set it up and do it. And even so there might be additional expenses - I don't know how much streaming our current server can handle. We are after all just horsey people...
Any takers??
Steph
Truman Prevatt
Mar 4, 2015, 2:02:35 PM3/4/15
to st...@endurance.net, Ridecamp Teeter
“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you” Joseph Heller
On Mar 4, 2015, at 11:10 AM, stephanie teeter <st...@endurance.net> wrote:A little history - why the AERC board seems so secretive:
In 1995 my (smart and visionary technologist) husband John encouraged me to start a webpage for Endurance. The internet was just developing. So I procured the domain www.Endurance.Net, learned how to write html code, and started a little webpage. Started with pictures, and links to other information sites out there. At the time Endurance.Net was one of the first 1000 websites! John also showed me how to start an email listserve - so endu...@moscow.com was born (John started an ISP in Moscow, Idaho so we had that domain already). And later changed to ride...@endurance.net.
The next step was AERC - I went to a board meeting in Reno (1996) and handed out folders with info on the web and internet to all the board members. I think Dane Frazier was president at that time. The board approved my informal proposal 'Let's Get Wired!' , so I procured www.AERC.org and started an email list for the board members. I built the first AERC.org website - basically listing contact info, board members, committees, etc - news, HOF stuff, photos.
Well... after a couple years the 'privacy' battles began with the AERC email list. The AERC leadership insisted that emails sent to the list should be private, not to be shared or forwarded to non-board members. It sort of became a battle. At that time most email address where shared by spouses so the idea that emails should/could be private was a bit of a joke. So 'private' posts were leaking out, John and I were insisting that it was both ludicrous and against the fundamentals of a non-profit business to be conducting business behind closed doors. (we weren't technically conducting business, but discussions and persuasions were occurring and opinions were being formed without benefit of membership feedback).
I was in the hot seat on the board at that time, butting heads with a few board members and trying to build up Endurance.Net while maintaining AERC.org. Mike Maul started helping out with AERC.org, Russ Humphrey (Microsoft programmer) got involved and we started the horse/rider database. I was under attack for building up Endurance.Net (and undermining AERC.org - was the claim) and at this point the AERC email list posts were getting nastier and more aggressive. The nastier the posts got, the more insistent some were on having it remain private, out of the view of the membership.
Board members insisted that they didn't want to have to defend their views against internet riff-raff. (Ride...@endurance.net was growing, and folks were becoming more 'vocal' ) . I insisted that the posts and dialog on the aerc board list were becoming more accusatory and outrageous, as a result of being 'private'. And the board members were starting to function in a 'bubble'.
Eventually the AERC board list went from our private server, to the Yahoo groups. I stopped working on the aerc.org page and handed it all over to Mike. I became very unhappy on the board, under constant attack from one particular member, the board became more polarized as the battle escalated - the battleground was almost exclusively on the AERC board email list. I truly believe this wouldn't have happened if the posts that board members made on the list had been available for viewing by the membership.
Steph, as being one of the first members of endu...@moscow.com - I want to thank you for all of your's and John’s hard work. Without your leadership and work - I don’t think we would be where we are today. The question about the BOD Email list really gets down to if the Emails are considered a “corporate record.” That may depend on the state but in most states - somewhat in response to Sarbanes-Oxely they are considered a corporate record. I ran into a buzz saw over this issue some years ago in Florida. There were a group of small technical companies in Sarasota that shared many of the same problem. About half of the companies were involved in US Government classified work so those that worked there had accounts on Government classified netwrks. The group of companies got together and formed a non-profit to help in bring highly trained technical talent to Sarasota, provide recruiting support, publishing the job opportunities and getting exposure in a business community that was otherwise dominated by tourism and retirement service economy.
My company’s GM decided I didn’t have enough to do and I could be abrasive (he had personal experience ;-)) enough to make sure everybody got a fair deal so he nominated me for the BOD of this non-profilt. One of the first things we did was to decide we needed an independent server to support our effort which also including managing the Email and records associated with this non-profilt. We went out for information and then a request for proposal. Of course we discussed this through Email and since the non-profit didn’t have a corporate Email for the non-profit it was either through our personal Email or company. Because of computer security and privacy risk we decided against using any of the available “groups”, e.g. Yahoo Groups. The few of us working DOD work, spend most of our time by our classified computers and most of us knew the risk of using personal Emails for this so we talked with each other over the classified networks.
We made a selection and of course one of the competitors wasn’t happy and his lawyer demanded to see every Email and have transcripts of every personal conversation associated with this procurement. Of course we refused and they sued. Since three or four of us had screwed up we turned it over to our security people and they refused to comply with the demand for Emails. They kept pushing and a state judge said our companies had to comply. The rub was, the companies did not own the computers or networks, the US Government did. Since I worked with a couple of these guys on a couple (classified programs) some of the discussion was in Emails that also discussed these programs, like (BTW which proposal do you like?) at the end, hence fell under Federal law and were technically owned by the US Government. So it got elevated to DOD security. They flat said no - after they reamed us out for getting a case of the stupid. They got a federal judge to over rule the state judge but said we must provide redacted versions. We were directed to redact the Emails in question and redact all markings and once the security approved the redacting - the redacted Emails were supplied. Of course the lawyer was not happy with getting a bunch of Emails where 90% of it was black marks from redacting - that’s all the got. The poor guys that used their company Email accounts weren’t so lucky all Emails were turned over - every word of them.
Bottom line, I believe that in most states Emails that discuss corporate business and clearly a BOD Email list is established to do just that are corporate records. Corporate records - with some exceptions, personnel information for example - should be available to the shareholders which in our case are the members.
I totally agree - the AERC BOD list should be open in a read only format to the members. Some constraints such as a week delay would be probably acceptable but to keep it closed is not in my opinion a valid option because in doing so you are hiding corporate records. And you are absolutely correct in your assertion that if the BOD knew the members were watching the board list it would help mitigate issues of uncivil behavior.
Maybe the BOD should take a look at
Truman
Keith Kibler
Mar 4, 2015, 3:07:52 PM3/4/15
to st...@endurance.net, Ridecamp Teeter
People are attacking eggs?
What is this world coming too?
Oh Dios mio
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecamp+u...@endurance.net.
--
Katrina Mosshammer
Mar 4, 2015, 3:14:52 PM3/4/15
to ridecamp
Yeah that Humpty Dumpty is a real shady character. Better watch out for
him. 
Katrina
Mosshammer (AERC # 5763)
"Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only that the cat died nobly." - Arnold Edinborough
"A Tevis completion does not require a super horse with a super rider. It requires a well conditioned horse of almost any breed with a rider who has his/her head screwed on right and a big dream inside it." - Julie Suhr
"Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only that the cat died nobly." - Arnold Edinborough
"A Tevis completion does not require a super horse with a super rider. It requires a well conditioned horse of almost any breed with a rider who has his/her head screwed on right and a big dream inside it." - Julie Suhr
Lynn White
Mar 4, 2015, 3:40:24 PM3/4/15
to ridecamp
Isn't there a software package that transcribes verbal langurge into print? I saw a commercial of a product that does this but I can't remember what it was. I think it's "dragon" or something. If a product is purchased off the shelf nobody needs to be hired. If we can use something like this at formalized Board meetings some of the discussions and presentations of argurments for or against motions can be expressed so that members can access it. You can still operate under Roberts Rules. I've read through some of the minutes meetings and I find a general lack of supporting arguments regarding policy and decision making. And when I use the work "arguments" I don't mean it in a negative sense. I think of arguments as more of making an opinion based on something. Working in this manner makes board members have to prepare their arguments, but it's very transparent and saves rancor and time. There is nothing to prevent BoD members from having heated discussions in private. Frankly, after everything I've read I'm not sure I'd want to be a fly in the room during these "private" discussions.
I'm thankful for all the people that work hard for AERC. It's a great organization when one takes into account the huge variety of people endurance attracts. As we all know, horse people are an opinionated and myopic bunch. For an organiztion as big as AERC work so well and last so long says something about the leadership.
Any leadership position involoivng a horse club doesn't requrie cojones or eggs or grits or breakfast. It just requires extra time, some money, and a very thick skin.
As soon as this blasted wind stops I'm going riding. Wish I could be at convention, but I only have so much vacation time.
-Lynn
Maryben Stover
Mar 4, 2015, 4:07:05 PM3/4/15
to ridecamp
Dragon is a program that does automatically transcribe dictation. However, it is very difficult to use if the dictator does not speak very clearly. Some of the dictation we get is hysterical once dragon has transcribed it. It is even worse than the auto correct of some of the phones. One of our attorneys gets his name typed as refugee hacked. Thank you for your Christian corporate respect to this matter (not sure what that is supposed to be). Please deify (should be please be advised). But you get the idea. The BOD meetings would be a riot.
As far as arguments go, Robert's Rules says to record what was done and not what was said, which makes for nice concise minutes but does not go into detail. There is probably a happy medium somewhere.
..........mb
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 13:40:13 -0700
As far as arguments go, Robert's Rules says to record what was done and not what was said, which makes for nice concise minutes but does not go into detail. There is probably a happy medium somewhere.
..........mb
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 13:40:13 -0700
Subject: Re: [RC] Re: Reports and AERC
Merri Melde
Mar 4, 2015, 4:35:51 PM3/4/15
to ride...@endurance.net
clearly, someone could volunteer to be the meeting stenographer, you know, like the court stenographer in the movies. that person could then spend their time typing up the meetings. It wouldn't cost anything.
Volunteers?Truman Prevatt
Mar 4, 2015, 4:46:07 PM3/4/15
to ride...@endurance.net
In the mid ’70 I worked on the problem of automatic “keyword spotting” and automated “speaker recognition” while at NSA. NSA was pouring large amounts of money into both technologies and has over time. Machine processing of the spoken word was important because linguist were hard to fine and almost impossible in some languages. Text is very easy for automated machine processing, however, for human voice it is quite difficult. Some languages are easier than others. For example the romanic languages are more susceptible to this type of processing than the tonal languages (Japan, China, etc.) because of the lack of statistical separation in the tonal languages especially with the heavy reliance of intonation to define the meaning in tonal languages.
The issue is not so much processing horsepower - it is there is not the statistical separation within the spoken word required to keep the error rate low. Add to that the statistical properties of speech change when someone has a cold vs. when they don’t, etc. The issues MB points out are not new and have been around since the ’70’s. The only way to get the error rate down is to limit the vocabulary - the smaller the possible outcomes of an experiment the more reliable the statistic. Tailor the vocabulary so that the words have a large statistical separation. It is easy for a system to tell the difference when you are asked to say a number between 0 and 9 - not so easy if every word in the English language is allowed. Use the same speaker in the same “quite" acoustic environment - not a noisy restaurant or a poor cell phone link.
Even spell checkers have difficult time and they are working on text - one word at a time. Speech is orders of magnitude more difficult. For example, Microsoft word insist my name is Turban Pervert ;-).
I would not think such systems such as Dragon would be a good fit to transcribe board meetings.
Truman
---
"Crash programs fail because they are based on the theory that, with nine women pregnant, you can get a baby a month. " Wernher von Braun
---
"Crash programs fail because they are based on the theory that, with nine women pregnant, you can get a baby a month. " Wernher von Braun
Diane Trefethen
Mar 4, 2015, 4:47:07 PM3/4/15
to AERCMemb...@yahoogroups.com, ride...@endurance.net
The questions of detailed minutes and the secrecy surrounding the BOD’s email
list have come up before. If the purpose of the minutes is to fulfill a legal
requirement that SOME record be kept and since Robert’s allows it, just the
date, “We talked,” and the secretary’s signature might suffice. But is that why
we keep minutes?
I would submit that the membership would say, “No,” except for those members who
don’t know keeping everything a secret is illegal. I know I want to know what
was discussed and who supported and who opposed an idea, even if that idea is
tabled. I want to know who voted Yea and who voted Nay on motions, especially
the important ones. If I were present at each BOD meeting, I could record them
and thereby have all that information. So, isn’t that why we have a Secretary?
So we don’t all have to actually BE there?
With respect to the email list, unless I am mistaken, the Brown Act in
California does not apply to 501(c)(3) organizations. Nevertheless, the AG of CA
has issued an opinion that the sections prohibiting the use of an intermediary
or technological devise by a majority of members of a legislative body to
“develop a collective concurrence as to action to be taken on an item” APPLIES
TO EMAILS. Since 501(c)s ARE subject to open meeting laws, it is quite likely
that a complaint about a majority of a BOD evading that legal requirement by
using emails to conduct discussions would find a friendly ear with the AG’s
office. Do we really need to wait to find out? If the BOD opened the list for
viewing by members and members could provide input on the AERC Members Forum or
with mass emailings to the Board, I doubt the AG would find that problematic
under open meeting rules applicable to 501(c)s.
Diane Trefethen
AERC #2691
West Region
list have come up before. If the purpose of the minutes is to fulfill a legal
requirement that SOME record be kept and since Robert’s allows it, just the
date, “We talked,” and the secretary’s signature might suffice. But is that why
we keep minutes?
I would submit that the membership would say, “No,” except for those members who
don’t know keeping everything a secret is illegal. I know I want to know what
was discussed and who supported and who opposed an idea, even if that idea is
tabled. I want to know who voted Yea and who voted Nay on motions, especially
the important ones. If I were present at each BOD meeting, I could record them
and thereby have all that information. So, isn’t that why we have a Secretary?
So we don’t all have to actually BE there?
With respect to the email list, unless I am mistaken, the Brown Act in
California does not apply to 501(c)(3) organizations. Nevertheless, the AG of CA
has issued an opinion that the sections prohibiting the use of an intermediary
or technological devise by a majority of members of a legislative body to
“develop a collective concurrence as to action to be taken on an item” APPLIES
TO EMAILS. Since 501(c)s ARE subject to open meeting laws, it is quite likely
that a complaint about a majority of a BOD evading that legal requirement by
using emails to conduct discussions would find a friendly ear with the AG’s
office. Do we really need to wait to find out? If the BOD opened the list for
viewing by members and members could provide input on the AERC Members Forum or
with mass emailings to the Board, I doubt the AG would find that problematic
under open meeting rules applicable to 501(c)s.
Diane Trefethen
AERC #2691
West Region
Joe Long
Mar 4, 2015, 4:55:43 PM3/4/15
to tpre...@mindspring.com, ride...@endurance.net
Yep. Board meetings are
not a single person speaking clearly into a nearby microphone in a quiet
room. There is a large square array of tables for over two dozen
people, with several microphones placed about. It is difficult for a
human to understand what it being said to transcribe it, for a computer
application it's pretty hopeless.
In the mid ’70 I worked on the problem of automatic “keyword spotting” and automated “speaker recognition” while at NSA. NSA was pouring large amounts of money into both technologies and has over time. Machine processing of the spoken word was important because linguist were hard to fine and almost impossible in some languages. Text is very easy for automated machine processing, however, for human voice it is quite difficult. Some languages are easier than others. For example the romanic languages are more susceptible to this type of processing than the tonal languages (Japan, China, etc.) because of the lack of statistical separation in the tonal languages especially with the heavy reliance of intonation to define the meaning in tonal languages.The issue is not so much processing horsepower - it is there is not the statistical separation within the spoken word required to keep the error rate low. Add to that the statistical properties of speech change when someone has a cold vs. when they don’t, etc. The issues MB points out are not new and have been around since the ’70’s. The only way to get the error rate down is to limit the vocabulary - the smaller the possible outcomes of an experiment the more reliable the statistic. Tailor the vocabulary so that the words have a large statistical separation. It is easy for a system to tell the difference when you are asked to say a number between 0 and 9 - not so easy if every word in the English language is allowed. Use the same speaker in the same “quite" acoustic environment - not a noisy restaurant or a poor cell phone link.Even spell checkers have difficult time and they are working on text - one word at a time. Speech is orders of magnitude more difficult. For example, Microsoft word insist my name is Turban Pervert ;-).I would not think such systems such as Dragon would be a good fit to transcribe board meetings.Truman
---
"Crash programs fail because they are based on the theory that, with nine women pregnant, you can get a baby a month. " Wernher von Braun
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecamp+u...@endurance.net.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Dragon is a program that does automatically transcribe dictation. However, it is very difficult to use if the dictator does not speak very clearly. Some of the dictation we get is hysterical once dragon has transcribed it. It is even worse than the auto correct of some of the phones. One of our attorneys gets his name typed as refugee hacked. Thank you for your Christian corporate respect to this matter (not sure what that is supposed to be). Please deify (should be please be advised). But you get the idea. The BOD meetings would be a riot.
As far as arguments go, Robert's Rules says to record what was done and not what was said, which makes for nice concise minutes but does not go into detail. There is probably a happy medium somewhere.
..........mb
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecamp+u...@endurance.net.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Lynn White
Mar 4, 2015, 5:59:24 PM3/4/15
to ridecamp
Well, shoot! I thought some high tech thingy might make life easier for all. I figured that if someone could make a saddle that fit a sway-backed horse someone could devise software that could take dictation. What was I thinking!?
ra...@sisuwest.us
Mar 4, 2015, 6:18:53 PM3/4/15
to ride...@endurance.net
On 3/4/2015 3:46 PM, Truman Prevatt
wrote:
, Microsoft word insist my name is Turban Pervert ;-).
I suspect that there are members of this list that agree with
Microsoft....
Ed
"Its a JOKE, son a JOKE"... Foghorn Leghorn ca. 1952
Ed
"Its a JOKE, son a JOKE"... Foghorn Leghorn ca. 1952
Truman Prevatt
Mar 4, 2015, 7:16:33 PM3/4/15
to ra...@sisuwest.us, ride...@endurance.net
Probably ;-).
T
__
“Fear not the path of Truth for the lack of People walking on it.” Robert F. Kennedy
“Fear not the path of Truth for the lack of People walking on it.” Robert F. Kennedy
Maryben Stover
Mar 4, 2015, 7:29:33 PM3/4/15
to ridecamp
Even professional court reporters cannot get testimony when more than one person is talking.
..........mb
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 14:35:37 -0700
..........mb
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 14:35:37 -0700
Subject: Re: [RC] Re: Reports and AERC
Maryben Stover
Mar 4, 2015, 7:30:33 PM3/4/15
to ridecamp
At least it got your name right.
..........mb
From: tpre...@mindspring.com
Subject: Re: [RC] Reports and AERC
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 16:46:00 -0500
To: ride...@endurance.net
..........mb
From: tpre...@mindspring.com
Subject: Re: [RC] Reports and AERC
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 16:46:00 -0500
To: ride...@endurance.net
Barbara MCrary
Mar 4, 2015, 10:51:38 PM3/4/15
to ride...@endurance.net
I remember when Steph started Ridecamp. She handed out little stickers (or buttons) with @ on them at the convention. It was quite a novelty.
As for nastiness, it happens because people can get away with it; there isn’t a face opposite you so you can say anything you want without fear of an angry face or a horrified expression. It’s called hiding behind anonymity. I think it’s sad, because nastiness really doesn’t get the response that temperate words will. We may not agree with someone, but it certainly doesn’t help to be mean.
My father, who was a big influence in my life, was a kind and diplomatic person. His last job before retirement was as a foreman for a huge construction company. When he caught an employee “leaning on the shovel handle” and being a general pain, my father simply looked at him and said, “Johnny, you’re a bad egg.” Considering my father’s character, that was worse than someone swearing and storming around. Johnny promptly shaped up…
People don’t have to say nasty things to get attention and response from the person or persons they are addressing.
Barbara
From: ridecampre...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ridecampre...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Carla Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 8:51 AM
To: ride...@endurance.net
Subject: Re: [RC] Re: Reports and AERC
Thank you, Steph, you and John, for starting up the aerc.org website and endurance.net website, and Ridecamp.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
Darcy
Mar 5, 2015, 6:30:26 AM3/5/15
to ride...@endurance.net
Maryben is absolute correct on the usage of the Dragon software capabilities. There is an upgraded version, at a higher cost, of course, that does a better job with translation but is initially programmed one users vernacular.
I broke my right wrist as I was completing an MBAS last year and used the Dragon to complete my Capstone. Doing a 55 page document with statistical graphs - very difficult. I cannot imagine how a BOD meeting could be documented with the use of this software, successfully!
Sent from my iPad
Truman Prevatt
Mar 5, 2015, 7:38:54 AM3/5/15
to ride...@endurance.net
Hmmm…
More than one person has pointed that out! One was a fellow I used to do a lot work for - and saved his butt more than once. He was writing me a memo one and noticed it and told me. He thought it was a hoot and started referring to me as “the pervert." His first name was Murray. Then I brought up Word in front of him and entered his name and the spell checker wanted to change it to “Murky.” So I said there you have the Pervert and his sidekick Murky. That was some years ago - I believe the spell checkers have improved over time. At the least the one on my Mac doesn’t seem to make such mistakes.
T
__
“There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” Robert F. Kennedy
“There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” Robert F. Kennedy
Darcy
Mar 5, 2015, 7:48:54 AM3/5/15
to ride...@endurance.net
It is 4:11am, PST, at the Grand Sierra Resort, Reno, NV. The heater vent in my room booms going off and on every 40 minutes - hence I am awake and reading this thread. I have to say how mind-boggling the thread in this forum has read for me. What is not mind-boggling is the passion that most posters have managed to portray in their own defense, on behalf of someone else, and finally the horse!
Perhaps that is where the discussion needs to begin and end - 'what do me, as members, need to do, know, and be good will ambassadors about' - with the preservation and protection of the animals entrusted into our care? Does that include the need to read every BOD meeting verbatim?
I, personally, do not need to know or what to read the nitty gritty machinations that takes place during a BOD meeting. I quite frankly do not have the time nor do I understand how anyone has that kind of time. I am not even riding at the present time and have little extra time to manage being concerned about the ins and outs of BOD meetings. All that aside the first question that should be on the table at any given time, in my way of thinking about the AERC BOD is, "Has the BOD significantly addressed and met the needs pertaining to the health and well being of all those within AERC's jurisdiction?" The second question, "Do I feel the BOD is appropriately allocating funds entrusted to them by the general membership?" Lastly, if the answer to either or question is negative my final question would be, "What are my alternatives?"
Most certainly a number of RideCamp members have made ultimate statements leaving little to no room for discussion to achieve a positive outcome. Especially in view of getting on the 'it's us or them' bandwagon. Passionate yes - most definitely. Wise -no!
I admire anyone's passion that is in the best interest to preserve and protect our horses. And they are all our horses given the fact we belong to an organization that helps us to become one with each other for the best interest for all. What is difficult to evaluate is where preservation and protection ends and the 'witch hunt' begins. Are we looking to blame someone or something in order to make sense of some of the horrific things we are witnessing on a global scale? Or are we just trying to use the BOD as scapegoats to make up for the shortcomings in our own lives? Many of you seem to genuinely want problem resolution to take place. How does that happen? How does that work if we are threatening to shake up the very core of people we elected to put in place to resolve problems and issues placed on the BOD agenda?
It grieves me to read some of the things I read both publicly and in private that only rips and tears at the fabric woven to preserve and protect the reasonable ideology and assumptions as outlined in the AERC Rules & Regulations (Revised December 1, 2014). Bottom lines : If the AERC BOD does not meet your expectations of the AERC Rules & Regulations then stand up and be counted. Write and voice your concerns in order to form a positive agenda. Better yet, attend convention! Otherwise all we have is chaos - mass chaos, confusion, and most certainly will not act as a voice in the best interest of our horses.
Best regards,
D'Arcy
Sent from my iPad
ride...@juno.com
Mar 5, 2015, 9:58:44 AM3/5/15
to st...@endurance.net, ride...@endurance.net
Steph, I am so glad I read this. Excellent history lesson. Seems like yesterday Dave Bennett called me and told me about this cool thing called internet he had at work and that he had found an Endurance thing on it. Not horribly long after that my in-laws paid over $1,000 each to buy each of their children little COLOR computers that we hooked up with dial up. I had to make a phone call to check ridecamp and boy did I hear that call go through a lot of times. :-) Thanks for all you've done. As for the board, yeah, it's a mystery to me why subjects aren't brought up on line. When your rep says, "Nobody says a thing to me at rides about this subject" I'm thinking, "Seriously? I've got things to do at a ride. Now today is a snow day and I might like discussing something, but then that would be on the internet so suddenly my opinions are from those malcontents on-line". :-P
Angie McGhee
____________________________________________________________
Man, 63, Avoids Wrinkles
63 Yr Old Man Shares Simple DIY Skin Tightening Method He Uses At Home
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/54f86ee122ddd6ee11be6st04vuc
Angie McGhee
Man, 63, Avoids Wrinkles
63 Yr Old Man Shares Simple DIY Skin Tightening Method He Uses At Home
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/54f86ee122ddd6ee11be6st04vuc
stephanie teeter
Mar 5, 2015, 10:16:09 AM3/5/15
to ride...@juno.com, Ridecamp Teeter
We do tend to take each other (and ourselves) way too seriously on the internet! I had a friend in highs school that used to laugh all the time - at everything - it made things so much more enjoyable. I try really hard to just laugh at the over-the-top internet stuff, it helps! (including some of my posts!)
Steph
Steph
John Teeter
Mar 5, 2015, 10:50:29 AM3/5/15
to Ridecamp Teeter
And she was laughing as they (Merri/Nanc/Carol/Steph) pulled out to head to Reno! There is, of course, spotty cell connection on the way down through Oregon, so maybe Merri will post a few picts when they stop for coffee in Jordan Valley:)
jt
(p.s. to stay on topic - I think I may have the back-ups of those early days of the AERC Board of Directors mailing list somewhere. If there is a statute of limitations on the embargo on them, I might prepare an archive for public consumption for next winter's bed-time reading. I'd almost bet you could read those 20 year old archives and pretty much know what the current board is pecking about:)
Lynn White
Mar 5, 2015, 11:40:22 AM3/5/15
to ridecamp
Steph,
Do you want me to search YouTube for another funny cat-fight? Laughter is the best way to put things in perspective.
Have fun and drive safe.
-Lynn
deser...@aol.com
Mar 6, 2015, 1:47:30 AM3/6/15
to ride...@endurance.net
Hi Steph & Angie,
That sounds just like you Steph. I've met you at rides and you are always ready to laugh in the midst of chaos! I remember finding out about Ridecamp and Endurance.net from an old-time (1970's)endurance rider in the PNER, who was at that time breeding and training Arabian racehorses. She found out I was interested in endurance and directed me to Steph's websites in 1998, which was about 2 years after I did my first LD.
Then in 2000 or 2001, I went to the Convention in Reno, and you were both there, I remember Donna Snyder-Smith, I think, pulling Angie up to be her demo person. Fun times. This year my friend and her husband are at the Convention, hope you're having fun Jamie & Paul.
I hope that the Board moves to full transparency. I have had a lot of respect for the people I've met on this group over the last 17 years. There have been a few who have come (and usually gone--with or without our dear moderator's help) that have made me wonder if they understood our sport at all, but I've watched others come into this group and learn and contribute to the wealth of knowledge that is here and on Endurance.net. Pretty cool overall, just a little crazy politics while we're going stircrazy waiting for the winter weather to break.
jeri
That sounds just like you Steph. I've met you at rides and you are always ready to laugh in the midst of chaos! I remember finding out about Ridecamp and Endurance.net from an old-time (1970's)endurance rider in the PNER, who was at that time breeding and training Arabian racehorses. She found out I was interested in endurance and directed me to Steph's websites in 1998, which was about 2 years after I did my first LD.
Then in 2000 or 2001, I went to the Convention in Reno, and you were both there, I remember Donna Snyder-Smith, I think, pulling Angie up to be her demo person. Fun times. This year my friend and her husband are at the Convention, hope you're having fun Jamie & Paul.
I hope that the Board moves to full transparency. I have had a lot of respect for the people I've met on this group over the last 17 years. There have been a few who have come (and usually gone--with or without our dear moderator's help) that have made me wonder if they understood our sport at all, but I've watched others come into this group and learn and contribute to the wealth of knowledge that is here and on Endurance.net. Pretty cool overall, just a little crazy politics while we're going stircrazy waiting for the winter weather to break.
jeri
-----Original Message-----
From: stephanie teeter <st...@endurance.net>
To: rides2far <ride...@juno.com>
Cc: Ridecamp Teeter <ride...@endurance.net>
Sent: Thu, Mar 5, 2015 7:16 am
Subject: Re: [RC] Re: Reports and AERC
From: stephanie teeter <st...@endurance.net>
To: rides2far <ride...@juno.com>
Cc: Ridecamp Teeter <ride...@endurance.net>
Sent: Thu, Mar 5, 2015 7:16 am
Subject: Re: [RC] Re: Reports and AERC
wrote: > Steph, I am so glad I read this. Excellent history lesson. Seems like yesterday Dave Bennett called me and told me about this cool thing called internet he had at work and that he had found an Endurance thing on it. Not horribly long after that my in-laws paid over $1,000 each to buy each of their children little COLOR computers that we hooked up with dial up. I had to make a phone call to check ridecamp and boy did I hear that call go through a lot of times. :-) Thanks for all you've done. As for the board, yeah, it's a mystery to me why subjects aren't brought up on line. When your rep says, "Nobody says a thing to me at rides about this subject" I'm thinking, "Seriously? I've got things to do at a ride. Now today is a snow day and I might like discussing something, but then that would be on the internet so suddenly my opinions are from those malcontents on-line". :-P > > Angie McGhee > > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages