Re: Q to Peter, Richard, Ed, Johnny, Tanya

by tcspain(at)unccvm.uncc.edu (TANYA SPAIN)

 Date:  Mon, 12 Jan 1998 11:51:30 -0500
 To:  eva(at)algonet.se,
hwg-elections(at)hwg.org,
bart(at)bgrafyx.com,
kt96(at)bcs.org.uk,
rtuttle(at)cet.com,
ed(at)clarkston.com,
johnny(at)opus.autoroute.net
  todo: View Thread, Original
Eva and fellow Guild Members,

May I begin by suggesting that you only consider the following names in
this election, as they are the _only_ candidates who took this election
seriously enough to submit a profile:

Frederick J. Barnett      91
Harold A. Driscoll     1788
Demitrius Lopez           142
Peter Knaggs                2
Gerald Oskoboiny      416
Tanya Spain                  0

The following candidates have _no profile_ on-line!! That concerns me, as
there was ample time to compose and submit profiles and the deadline was
made clear in the nomination letter!

Tarik Dozier               360
Jimmie McWhirt         258
David Humphreys         55
Susan Duncan             46
Richard Tuttle                2
Ed Pastelak                  0
Johnny Mo                    0

Eva, I am also concerned with this statement:

>I'd also like to stress your (except for Peter) failure in submitting
>Candidate Presentation making you total strangers to me.

Please tell me more about my failure to make a Candidate Presentation? I am
truly not aware of this missed opportunity. I would definitely appreciate
the chance to introduce myself further to the group. Can you provide me
with more information?

Now to get to the heart of your message: What do I have to offer?

I want to thank you for being a conscientious member and questioning what
I, and all of the candidates, have to offer. That means a lot to me, even
though I am on the hot seat!

Let me direct you, first, to my profile submitted to the Guild, briefly
covering my Vision and Qualifications:
http://www.hwg.org/election1998/spain.html

Second, I, like every listed member of the Guild, have a lot to offer the
Guild! As you are aware, the strength of this Guild, and any Guild, is in
its membership. Each name in the Guild's membership signifies not just a
name, but an individual - an individual who is concerned about the web, its
issues and its development. Each individual in this Guild has, in my
opinion, increased the Guild's impact simply by signing up! Each
individual's membership indicates a vote of confidence in the Guild and its
mission, a commitment to the goals of the Guild and, most importantly,
support for this type of community!

Third, my candidacy should illustrate to you that I am making a serious
effort to get involved in the Guild, beyond reading the web pages and posts
to the listserves. By running as a candidate for the Governing Board, I am
choosing to offer my involvement, ideas, time and resources to help the
Guild in its mission at the core level. By running as a candidate for the
Governing Board, I am offering my skills to each member, in a way I feel I
can contribute most. Elected or not, I am making an effort to be an
involved Guild member and hope to continue my contacts with you and other
members, new and old, as I maintain my membership and contributions!

Agreeably, participation in the listserve discussions is a factor worth
considering when faced with electing a member of the Guild's Governing
Board. I appreciate that you have stressed how important listserv
participation is to you. I will intentionally make an effort to improve my
listserve communications, whether or not I am elected!

Listserve participation cannot alone judge the willingness, integrity and
value of a member and that member's contribution potential. Please see my
side, as a member, not a candidate. There are so many ways for
participating and communicating as a Guild member. These options should be
explored, as I am a prime example of how listserves aren't effective for
all members. I believe they are very important and serve a tremendous need,
however, I think other methods of communication should be explored. I don't
think I am alone in saying that listserves don't "reach" everyone. As a
Guild member and as a part of the Governing Board,  I can contribute to
developing and maintaining other forms of sharing and communication,
including, but not at all limited to, on-line training, which I do
professionally for the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

Listserve participation cannot be the sole determining factor in a member's
worth. When faced with choosing from the many candidates, do you consider
professional experience, knowledge of many facets of web issues, the
ability to contribute in several areas, the willingness to contribute time
and skills without pay, the desire to become involved in a deeper sense
than listserves? I think these are all VERY important factors which I can
contribute.

As a member of the Guild, I offer all of the above and my committment,
knowledge, professional experience, professional expertise and my passion
for learning, teaching and sharing. Put me to the test!  Let me show you
the many ways there are to be an contributing member of our Guild, ways
which reach beyond listserve participation.

If you have read this far, thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Tanya Spain



>For me the Guild is a place where members help one another by sharing
>information therefore I measure each member's involvement with the
>organization by their participation in the HWG mailing lists. The statistics
>below show your postings to the HWG lists. Data was retrieved from the HWG
>archives last Friday and also includes all postings to -ops - which, at
>least for me, are not all that relevant.
>
>Some of you never or almost never contributed to the mailing lists and since
>you are not credited on the volunteers list I am also assuming you haven't
>contributed to the Guild behind the screens either.
>
>My question is: What do you Peter, Richard, Ed, Johnny and Tanya have to
>offer? I'd also like to stress your (except for Peter) failure in submitting
>Candidate Presentation making you total strangers to me.
>
>Taking the above into consideration I cannot possibly take your candidatures
>seriously. Why should I vote for you?
>
>Harold A. Driscoll     1788
>Gerald Oskoboiny      416
>Tarik Dozier               360
>Jimmie McWhirt         258
>Demitrius                   142
>Frederick J. Barnett      91
>David Humphreys         55
>Susan Duncan             46
>Peter Knaggs                2
>Richard Tuttle                2
>Ed Pastelak                  0
>Johnny Mo                    0
>Tanya Spain                  0
>
>/e

HWG: hwg-elections mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA