Message-ID: <3CB07933.6040009@mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 12:52:03 -0400
From: Adrian Birka <adbirka@MIT.EDU>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Megan McBee <memcbee@mit.edu>
CC: lmf <lmf@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: social members holding office
References: <5.0.2.1.2.20020407115751.00a3ed00@hesiod>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Megan:

If you think that Food Stewards should be residential members, you could 
propose that as an amendment to my amendment
at the meeting.  It is, of course, most clear ot you, and not me, how 
necessary it is for a Food Steward to be at LMF, and
therefore if such amendment were to come from you, I would probably 
accept it.

However, I think I can judge best whether Treasurer needs to be a 
resident member, and I don't believe that is the case.  The
problem you raise (weekly checks), is easily solved by finding a 
specific time of the week when I would give you a check,
or slide it under your door if you're not here.  If we were more 
organized about this, we would have done that a long time ago :)
But in any case, I don't think that giving a check to the Food Steward 
once a week is a serious problem for a Treasurer who
is a social member.  And as for the case of emergencies, the President 
has signing power on the accout also, so such emergencies
could be solved by him or her if the Tresurer is absent.

The other issue, about receipts - I could have posted my envelope in the 
kitchen just as easily as outside my door.  Since I never
collect the receipts from my envelope more often then once a week (and 
sometimes,when I am hosed, once a month), this would
not radically change things for a Treasurer who is a social member.

In conclusion, it is my opinion, based on my experience as a Treasurer, 
that a social member could do a great job as a Treasurer,
provided he or she is dedicated to her job; but that is a necessary 
condition for a residential member being a Treasurer also.  In any
case, a dedicated social member would do a much better job than a less 
dedicated residential member.  And that is the reason
for this amendment - to allow the house bigger choice at officer 
elections in order to find the person who would do the best job.

Sincerely,

Adrian.

Megan McBee wrote:

> Dear LMF,
>
> As current Food Steward, I competely agree with Diana.  The food 
> steward should definitely live in LMF because they need to be aware of 
> what is occurring in the house with respect to food and also social 
> issues (cooking teams always have a political edge).  They also need 
> to keep up with the house's needs.  If I wasn't living here,  I 
> wouldn't have any clue about what was going on, even if I came over 
> often.  The food steward also needs to be around to accept food orders.
>
> With respect to the treasurer,  initially, I didn't think it was a big 
> deal, but the more I think about it,  the more important it is that 
> the treasurer live in the house and be accessible.  Mainly to the food 
> steward.  The food steward needs weekly checks, and often forgets 
> about the check until the day the food is coming.  Many times,  I have 
> had to write a check myself, but if the steward doesn't have enough 
> money to cover,  the house is screwed.  The treasurer MUST be around 
> for emergencies.  On another note,  what would we do with receipts? 
> Leave them in the kitchen for them to be lost?  Just some things to 
> think about...
>
> Megan
>
> At 08:21 AM 4/7/02 -0400, Diana Cheng wrote:
>
>> Salut tout le monde,
>>
>> First of all, I'd like to thank Morgan for all the work he has done 
>> as President of LMF this past year.  I agree with the principle of 
>> his letting other people have the opportunity to hold his current 
>> office next year, to rotate positions as long as there is interest in 
>> holding the office.
>>
>> In response to Adrian's proposed change in the guidelines, I think 
>> that at the very least, Treasurer, Food Steward, and Rush chair 
>> officers should also be residents of LMF (in addition to the 
>> President and Vice President). In general, major / essential LMF 
>> activities should be centered around LMF, and we can't predict how 
>> active social members are going to be in the future, but we can be 
>> sure that residents of LMF are going to be held accountable to their 
>> official responsibilities merely by the fact that they live here.  
>> Specific reasons-
>> Treasurer: needs to be around to update signout sheets in a timely 
>> fashion, make checks out for the food stewards, and to receive 
>> receipts.  It could become very inconvenient to be looking for the 
>> treasurer if this officer does not live at LMF.
>>
>> Food Steward: needs to be around to receive food orders, to be aware 
>> of what is in stock, to be called upon when there isn't enough this 
>> or that, or when the cooking team can't locate an item.
>>
>> Rush: it's hypocritical to tell people how fun it is living at LMF 
>> when you don't live at LMF.
>>
>> * Diana *
>>
>>
>> ----------
>> Rejoignez le plus grand service de messagerie au monde avec MSN 
>> Hotmail. Cliquez ici
>
>