New Member Proposal System

[Michael Winnel]

Moving forward, I propose a new system whereby one must propose new members and gain approval by the group before emailing or contacting the proposed person/group. This way, if someone in the ICASM has information on why a certain person/group is not appropriate, then we can save a lot of time (rather than having to "backpedal" if we have already begun contact and started discussions). 

My proposal is simple:

1) All new member proposals to be made in this forum thread: 
Candidates for the expansion of ICASM

2) If after 1 week, no objections have been raised, one may go ahead and:
(i) Place new proposal in the Agora
(ii) Send pending member the official invite email (Onboarding CI templates)

Note: Once the Agora is published, proposals sit in the Agora for one month, at the end of which - providing there are no objections - the new groups are formally inducted as members. 

The core concept here is for members to apply discernment & skillful means in regards to communications with potential new members, given the fact objections may arise from within the ICASM before induction. 

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

Making bureaucratic rules more cumbersome is always a problem for organisations, especially if a rule is unlikely to be complied with, in which case there must be sanctions for non-compliance with the rule.

A few questions need to be asked here:

- What is the cost/benefit ratio of such a rule?

- is it likely to be respected?

In my opinion, since the Agora provides absolute security to the coalition, that no risky candidacy can succeed, this organically induces an upstream process, which everyone will naturally seek to gather everyone's opinion before inviting, via the general forum devoted to this issue, since otherwise he knows that he will be disavowed in the Agora and "lose face". There will certainly be a bit of learning to do and some "woes" at the beginning, but it will cost much less than changing the rules of procedure to introduce a new, very heavy rule.

I think such a rule is unlikely to be respected for several reasons:

- because the newcomers might issue invitations enthusiastically, but not yet know all the rules of procedure by heart: are they going to be punished for that?

- In the reality of each other's personal relationships, there are going to be all sorts of ways of being in contact and inviting, for example David L - who will probably not spend much time learning the rules of procedure by heart - will probably tell his contacts about ICASM, like Marilyn, or the ARC and others, and invite them more or less informally. And it's a good thing to do that.

So, I suggest letting everyone learn organically (to get into the habit of sharing with everyone the important issues, whatever they are), knowing that the Agora provides absolute security for the community and that there is no risk for the coalition upon arrival.

We must resist the bureaucratic temptation to believe that we can govern "by decree" by adding more and more new rules! I give this opinion as an "expert" in organizational matters.

[Michael Winnel]

JCL's proposal is an excellent improvement on my proposal, and I believe it resolves the matter. Thank you, and bravo!