Re: Problems with the board
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:57 pm
Internet Mormons, Chapel Mormons, Critics, Apologists, and Never-Mo's all welcome!
https://discussmormonism.com/
I am trying to relate this to my own experiences wherein I would be Shades in this scenario.Res Ipsa wrote: ↑Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:16 pmI think those are good points, Kish. The Board’s authority is set out in the articles of formation. But the Board can delegate anything, including setting rules for the Board.
Also, membership on the Board does not require (in my opinion should not require) monetary contribution. It requires people who will read the articles, do what they require, make sure any required reports are filed on time, and set up systems to make it hard for anyone with access to money to embezzle.
I don't see the problem with requiring up front donations to serve on the BOD. The central purpose of the thing is funding MDB to make sure it is kept in good working order and preserved. The donations wouldn't have to be big, but those who are interested in keeping MDB functional should at minimum be willing to contribute a certain amount toward that end. That way expectations of further donations from others would be kept realistic.Res Ipsa wrote: ↑Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:16 pmI think those are good points, Kish. The Board’s authority is set out in the articles of formation. But the Board can delegate anything, including setting rules for the Board.
Also, membership on the Board does not require (in my opinion should not require) monetary contribution. It requires people who will read the articles, do what they require, make sure any required reports are filed on time, and set up systems to make it hard for anyone with access to money to embezzle.
Every statement and/or assertion I have made concerning you on this thread was made in reference to your easily and well documented conduct on this board and my observation of it. Do not delude yourself with ideas about my recruiting a "girlfriend" from behind the scenes to post on this thread.
I am just spit-balling here. I hardly ever visit Spirit Paradise. My understanding is that Icarus spends most of his time here, and Icarus is interested in keeping MDB alive partly for that reason (although not only for that reason). If Icarus was willing to show up and put up money, then I would hardly write him out of the future of the board. In any case, an offer remains on the table, and, if I am reading everything correctly, Icarus is the one who made it.
I was planning to let this go, but since Icarus has again been suggested as being involved with the administration of the board, it’s worth mentioning:Kishkumen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:28 pm
I am just spit-balling here. I hardly ever visit Spirit Paradise. My understanding is that Icarus spends most of his time here, and Icarus is interested in keeping MormonDiscussions.com alive partly for that reason (although not only for that reason). If Icarus was willing to show up and put up money, then I would hardly write him out of the future of the board. In any case, an offer remains on the table, and, if I am reading everything correctly, Icarus is the one who made it.
We will see what happens. I am not going to jump the gun, but I would still like to express my interest in how the future of the board is secured, one way or another.
Icarus went to considerable effort here to disguise his comment by pretending he was just using a stock phrase, but his own previous posts tell a very different story. Regarding the same poster he referred to originally:Icarus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 13, 2020 12:46 pm
You do realize the question, "how long have you been beating your wife?" is a common rhetorical device used to point out someone else's faulty reasoning, right?
Guess not.
Move along there, small fry.
https://wikieducator.org/PHI-130:_Criti ... Answer_Key
And
And a little vague, but still obvious:Icarus wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:07 pmWell not everyone is this ____ stupid. If you're talking to a convicted felon with a history of violence towards women or children, you should want to know that. But I've never divulged that kind of information about anyone, just hinting to them that I very well could if they don't back the ____ off.Jersey Girl wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:26 amI don't care who a poster is, where they live, what they do or what they have done in their in real life (unless they choose to share it for some reason of their own).
And vague but in context obvious, bringing the count to at least 5:
And finally:
That’s not someone who should administer a discussion board. The ones he is outing, hinting about, etc. aren’t either, but he’s the one being discussed as owning the board.Icarus wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:07 pm
If you'd pay the ____ attention, I told you I did report it. I got no response. I wanted their remarks removed immediately, and so I took matters into my own hands to see that done. You're damned ____ right I did. If I don't get results in a timely manner, I'll take care of it myself.
The only thing I was thinking, Kish, is that having a financial donation as a requirement may shut out some people who would make very good directors. You're right that whoever's name is on the hosting account is financially responsible to the hosting company for paying fees. That doesn't mean the rest of us couldn't pitch in to help with the costs. If it's a non-profit, the organization is liable, not the board (assuming the Board has performed the necessary duties). The non-profit would raise funds, which would be used to pay the costs of running the board.Kishkumen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:23 pmI don't see the problem with requiring up front donations to serve on the BOD. The central purpose of the thing is funding MormonDiscussions.com to make sure it is kept in good working order and preserved. The donations wouldn't have to be big, but those who are interested in keeping MormonDiscussions.com functional should at minimum be willing to contribute a certain amount toward that end. That way expectations of further donations from others would be kept realistic.Res Ipsa wrote: ↑Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:16 pmI think those are good points, Kish. The Board’s authority is set out in the articles of formation. But the Board can delegate anything, including setting rules for the Board.
Also, membership on the Board does not require (in my opinion should not require) monetary contribution. It requires people who will read the articles, do what they require, make sure any required reports are filed on time, and set up systems to make it hard for anyone with access to money to embezzle.
After all, if we were to have a single person buy the board--as is now in the works--that person would be on the hook to pay for the board's upkeep, no?
As for the rest of it, I agree that it is crucial that paperwork be filed on time, that systems be put in place to insure the safety of donations, etc.
Yes. It would have to be researched for its applicability here, but Boards I’ve served on have typically had some type of trustee’s insurance in place to remove any liability.Res ipsa wrote:
If it's a non-profit, the organization is liable, not the board (assuming the Board has performed the necessary duties).
Yes, many non-profits have some flavor of Directors & Officers Insurance to protect them and the organizsation from claims short of malicious acts. I'm not sure the legal exposure would be worth the premium for the limited purpose of the non-profit we're talking about. If we get down the road and the eventual board wants to look into it, I know a few brokers and could get some quotes.Lemmie wrote: ↑Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:34 pmYes. It would have to be researched for its applicability here, but Boards I’ve served on have typically had some type of trustee’s insurance in place to remove any liability.Res ipsa wrote:
If it's a non-profit, the organization is liable, not the board (assuming the Board has performed the necessary duties).