Vote: By-Law Ammendment

[Scott]

At the last meeting of the IAP Board of Directors, we voted to accept the "Skill Recognition Program" as it was written in the original By-Laws. This measure now needs to be brought to a vote of the general membership, hence this vote. View the language of this proposed educational program under Article 3 at this link:

http://www.penturners.org/content/iap_bylaws_revised_9-5-04.pdf

Please take the time to read, understand, and vote on this major ammendment to the IAP By-Laws. This vote will run from Sunday 12/19/04 through Saturday 12/25/04, constituting the seven day period required in the By-Laws. Thank you!

 

[wayneis]

Even though I voted to accept this ammendment, I think that it will be close to impossable for most individuals to ever achieve the last class, "Grand Master Penturner". Attaining five is just way too much. There is only so many board positions available, there are only so many boards to sit on available and one would need to have more extra time available than most even dream of having.

Other than that I think that all of the recommendations are fair, reasonable and attainable to anyone who is interested in having the designation. Unless it was created in such a way that only an exceptional and very fortunate person would ever be able to gain this level, then I would like to see the board look at this last designation at some future date.

Wayne

 

[dougle40]

I think that Wayne said it all with regards to "Grand Master" .
We have members from all over the world and some of us don't have access to the AAW or don't belong to any clubs that are affiliated with them and being a Board member of the IAP would , for some , be out of the question for whatever reason , which would only leave 5 choises left . Pretty hard to fill in some of those especially those requiring having their work published , which would knock another one or two,leaving only 3 or 4 out of the 5 to qualify for .

 

[YoYoSpin]

We've heard these concerns before, but no recommendations for additional or different objective criteria have ever been proposed. If you have some ideas, please post them here.

 

[Vern]

I have a concern about this vote being Anonymous. Wouldn't it make more sense and be more relevant if this was a member’s only vote? Also, wouldn't this prevent multiple votes? We wouldn't want another Florida 2000 on our hands[]


I would secondly like to voice my support of Wayne and Doug's opinions regarding the requirements of the "Grand Master" certification being attached to any political affiliation

Happy Holidays!!

Vern

 

[Fred in NC]

Vern, when I voted, my option to vote disappeared from the screen. So I think we can only cast one vote each.

As for the awards or classes, I understand and even agree with what has been said. Also agree that these can be revised later if needed. As the rules stand right now, Grand Master is reserved for a select few who work beyond the call of duty to further the craft. Nothing wrong with that in my opinion. As for AAW membership and service, it is just one of the options.

 

[Vern]

Fred in NC wrote: Vern, when I voted, my option to vote disappeared from the screen. So I think we can only cast one vote each.

I thought so as well Fred, until I closed my browser and reopened to this topic and was presented with the opportunity to vote again.... I'm not suggesting that anyone should or would keep track of who voted how but that limiting it to members would be more logical rather than allowing any visitor that might happen onto the site to vote (potentially as many times as they felt like).

Happy Holidays!!

Vern

 

[wayneis]

Ed then why even have a level that can not be obtained by anyone that wants to. I'm a member of both the AAW and IAP but there are only so many slots, as far as a local group goes there is not one close enough for me to attend. I don't think that I'm alone or I would not have voiced my concern. The way it is set up now, the best pen crafter in the World may not have a chance to ever attain the highest level just because he/she isn't fortunate enough to live in the right place, have an extra amount of time or whatever.

Personally I was nominated for a board seat but because of time constraints and uncertain health concerns I regretfully had to turn it down. I decided that because I only had so much time to offer, I needed to make a choise. It was either continue trying to help answering questions on the two penturning forums I belong to or except a board seat if I was I voted voted in. I would guess that I spend as much time answerng individuals questions on the forums as most board members do with board work. I don't believe that either work is more important than the other but the board member is rewarded but someone like me is not. Please don't anyone get me wrong, I know that I am not only the only person that answers questions, I'm just trying to make a point that many could make and using myself as an example.

As for ideas, if something higher is needed or wanted then how about we re-name it something like a Certificate of Instruction an Award of Excellence and lower the number of items needed to qualify because I also believe that needing five is overboard.

Wayne

 

[Fred in NC]

Wayne, frankly titles don't mean that much to me. The best award is when a customer pulls money out of pocket and gives it to me. To me they are the best judges of my work and skills. I will go along with the group's decision, but more important to me is to be here and help the IAP and peers as much as I can.

 

[YoYoSpin]

Wayne, the short answer is...becoming the Grand Master has little to do with pen crafting skills and everything to do with pubic service. That's the way the program was set up and intended. I think it would be a noble and ambitious goal for anyone to pursue.

I'd be opposed to reducing the number of certs (merit badges) needed, but wouldn't mind a bit if we added another one, two or three. So, put your thinking caps on and make some recommendations.

 

[Gary Max]

I am with Fred on this one. I am came here to learn how to make a product that I can be proud of. The bottom line is the customer is my judge.

 

[low_48]

I'm against the whole idea of putting titles after our names. I'm afraid this will intimidate new members and they may be afraid to post. I know the change says this will optional, but we have had comments in our woodworking club about this subject. After listening and watching the near professional levels of some, the beginner is afraid to speak up. Maybe it will be easier to type than speak up, but I know it will intimidate some.

Rich

 

[KKingery]

I have to agree with Rich on this one - As a new turner, and mostly as a hobby, I don't see the need to have titles, etc..for folks. Let's face it, wether you've done this for 20 years, or 1 month, we're all basically still turners. As a newbie, I've already sold the required amount for grand whatever, - that requirement makes no sense. Just my 2 cents worth, but I voted against it.

 

[dougle40]

Rich makes a very good point there . I know that I've been intimadated a few times when I've gone into something and everyone else has been at it for a while . You almost feel afraid to ask questions for fear that they will think of you as some kind of dummy .

 

[Fred in NC]

The final verdict will come from the membership. Whether the amendment is approved or not, it is up to the individual to submit the work and ask for the awards. I believe, correct me if I am wrong, that a person can continue to be a member of IAP, and even become an officer even without participation in the awards program.

Membership in the AAW is open to all who are interested in wood turning. IAP is the same for those interested in penturning. Participation in any programs is, and should remain, totally voluntary. The day the character of this group changes into a closed society with hierachies it will cease to grow, and probably to exist. I don't believe this will happen !!!

 

[YoYoSpin]

Fred, you are exactly correct, in all respects.

There is only one legitimate reason for having a program like this...to provide a motivational tool for our membership. For some, motivation is not required, and greatness, or at least the best they can do, will be achieved on their own. For others, they may only excel when a challenge is present. If an endorsement program encourages one person to learn something that they would not have learned otherwise, then the program has served us well.

 

[Daniel]

I support Ed in his comments,
the only way anyones work will be considered for an endorsment level is if they intentionally submit it. the endorsment program is something each individual can choose to participate in or not. and in no way reflects on your ability to participate or be a mamber of the I.A.P.
I see the program as a way to move a beginner from the timidness the may have into a place they will interact more. I know that some extremely accomplished penturners have expressed no desire for it at all as well.It is a personnal choice.

 

[Fred in NC]

Originally posted by YoYoSpin
<br />We've heard these concerns before, but no recommendations for additional or different objective criteria have ever been proposed. If you have some ideas, please post them here.

These recommendations will come in due time.

For one thing, those living in other countries could qualify under other associations <u><b>similar</b></u> to the AAW.

 

[Glenn McCullough]

I think 1,2,6,7&8 should be retained for Grand master status as well as #1 be altered to some charitable time teaching the art of penturning.

I feel required charity donations negates its intent.

Charity work should be voluntary and considered independently,perhaps sharity hours accumulated may replace board sitting status, etc. I have a full time job and am trying to start a penmaking business. I have very little time for charity with two kids in college. It doesnt mean I dont have charitable desires. Do I have to be retired to have enough time to hold grand master status?

 

[knottyharry]

I can certainly see both side of this discussion. As for myself, I like the idea.
I do think there are people who want and need motivation. And if it is something that helps you to learn then it's a good thing.
It is strictly optional for those who want to participate in it.
But I think the last objective could be very hard to meet, reguardless of how much a person wanted to accomplish it.
There are several aspects of the last objective that a person just could not do. And some because of geographical location.
Myself like some of the rest of you have no clubs locally, and having a full sized lathe, opposed to a mini lathe, there is no way that I could take my lathe anywhere to give a demonstration with it. As for ever having any of my work published to a magazine. The chances are pretty slim. Which doesn't leave much.
Also time is going to be a big issue to a lot of people.
As Ed stated, it is geared to community service. And yes I would like to see other options added to the list. And I will see if I can come up with some ideas.
As for giving some of my work away, I don't have a problem with that.
Seems like most of it is given away anyhow.
One question I have about this is. When does this start? Or can you go back on things you have already done in some cases. Like for example..A year ago I had an article published in a magazine. Or two years ago I gave a demonstration to a group of Boy Scouts.
Or does this go forward from time of acceptance.
Harry

 

[Fred in NC]

Harry, I think your concerns are valid.

In my way of thinking, the intent of the Grand Master level is to reward those who:

1. Are very proficient in the craft and art of penturning.
2. Have made a significant contribution to the craft.
3. Have made a contribution to the community at large.

Obviously, it would be impossible to come up with a list of all possible qualifying events and contributions. I think an award at this level should be considered by the designated committe when it appears to be similar, even if not exactly, in nature to the examples in the by-laws.

One contribution that has been left out is INVENTION. Those who have contributed to the craft by inventing new tools, processes, etc. The criteria in this case would be based on the usefulness of a totally new idea or tool. This type of contribution can be made no matter where the person lives.

Again, these matters should be considered in due time. The amendment is being voted on right now. We can cross that bridge when we come to it.

Please be at easy, and not worry, my friends. Our officers are, and will take care of us. I give them a vote of confidence.

 

[woodwish]

Personally it doesn't make much difference to me whether we do this or not. I voted for it only because others seem to want the titles, I'm happy being known as "Ray, the woodturning nut" around here. In looking over the list I see no problem with the first three levels if a person workd hard to improve their skills. The fourth level is what bothered me, I have no intention of selling my pens because this is just a hobby to me. I have given away most of the ones I made as gifts or charity. Some that I gave to charity received pretty good money as auction items, would that count? Although I agree with others that the top level is difficult, but it should be so I have no real problem (actually I already think I meet three of them[^]).

Bottom line is that I have no better suggestions so I guess this is all fine if it is what the membership wants.

 

[low_48]

I agree with all the discussions. Very good points are being brought up. That was my intention, to bring up another point of discussion. I wish we could have two titles the same, I mean I thought Rich "the woodturning nut" was just a local title for me.[] Maybe I'll have to use the title off the Honeymooners, that was in Ralph's club. I shall be called Rich "The Grand High Exalted Majestic Ruler" of the burl pile. Hey, I'm not that old, I saw it on the reruns! Honest!

Rich

 

[wpenm]

I must agree with Fred. I let my customers determine what skill level I have achieved.I became a member to exchange ideas and communicate with others interested in penturning. I do not like my skill level being challenged for a title that I may or may not be able to obtain.

I submitted a pen to a group that determined it's membership by the so called skill level and it was turned down. They said the leather grip looked uneven or something like that. What was actually judged was my photography skills. That same type of pen remains one of my top sellers.

Enough of my thoughts.
Garry

 

[Fred in NC]

Garry, with all due respect to those here who might belong to that group, I did not bother to apply. Enough said.

 

[Gary Max]

I have figured out how to make a buck off this if it is passed---hehe.
You would be able to add this information as part of your sales pitch.
Yes Sir I am a menber of IPA and a (-------) penturner.
Heck might sell a few more because we all know the story helps the sale.
Heck a small sign on the table----IAP member (--------) penturner
You could figure out a way to make it work.

Oh Garry---I would never want to be a judge---never going to make everyone happy. I entered the contest to improve my skills not to win a prize.

 

[wayneis]

Gary you are on point in a way. Putting the IAP logo and a status level on a business card tell's the customer that you are accomplished and recognized in the craft of penturning. It is a sales tool, or could be if the org. gains the credibility to make it so.

 

[J. Fred Muggs]

I voted in favor of. Perhaps more than 8 options could be offered for the "Grand Poobah" rank, or perhaps fewer of the 8 required. But, I, for one believe the highest rank should be attainable by only the few who are indeed carrying penturning to new dimensions. It seems to me that all levels prior to Grand Master Penturner are the ones recognizing quality and pen turning ability and the ultimate level is for those who go beyond.

Frankly, I qualify now, if I submit pictures, for Master Professional Penturner. But, It'll be a long time, if ever, before I qualify for the top rank. And That's quite alright with me.

 

[RussFairfield]

I think that most of these messages are missing the intent of the title, "Grand Master Penturner". There is a general opinion that the qualifications should be watered down to make the rank more easily attainable. I am of the opposite opinion. They may not be difficult enough.[]

This is for the person who has attained the level of "Master Penturner", and then stands above that august group. How many "Grand Masters" can there be at one time? One? Two? Not more than 4 or 5 at the most. This was never intended to be a large group. Yes, the qualifications are difficult, and impossible for some. They should be. If they were easy, then everyone could attain this highest level. Should that be the case, What would be the meaning of the title "Grand Master"?

[)]

 

[Fred in NC]

Ah, Russ..... The NOBEL PRIZE of PENTURNING !

Russ, I seriously respect you as a master craftsman who has indeed made a significant contribution to penturning. As a matter of fact, the web page in your signature was a springboard and launching pad for my penturning efforts. Thus, I think you are one of the rare individuals who is already qualified for the royal title of Grand Master Penmaker.

However, in reading the bylaws of this organization, I don't believe it was the intention of our founding fathers to make this a closed society with an unattainable higher hierarchy. Given minor accomodations for geographical reasons, I sincerely believe that the goal of attaining the Grand Master level is within reach of most of our active members. Yes, it will take a lot of effort and perseverance to get there, but for those willing to persist it is not impossible.

At least in America, Russ, we don't believe in liveries or worshipful companies. That, in my humble understanding, is the reason why IAP was created. Equal opportunity for all who are willing to wait... as long as they work hard while they wait.

Very respectfully,

Fred in NC

 

[RussFairfield]

Participation in "The Program" is VOLUNTARY. Nothing is required, nothing is bestowed. It will be interesting to see how many applications are received.

 

[Daniel]

there is a bit of a flaw in the previous comments.
one the board did not write the endorsment program. the By Law committe did. so the trail of self serving does not hold up.
second the board was not directed to re-evaluate the endorsments it was directed to hold this vote on them. as for not hearing the membership. the vote at this time is 81% in favor of the endorsments as they are written all comments are welcome and appreciated but please keep nettiquet in mind as you form you comments.

 

[DCBluesman]

It's time for my voice to be heard on this. If you search through the active and archived posts, this program has been the subject of several hundred posts. There has been considerable disagreement over 1) whether or not to even have an endorsement program, 2) how many levels of endorsement should there be, 3) how should endorsements be established, 4) how should endorsement applications be handled, and on and on.

For a period of time, I had very serious misgivings on the program and it's implementation. Then I did the research. There continues to be a major outcry for an endorsement program. The program, as written and now before the membership for voting, has been the subject over a number of serious and, occasionally heated, debates. When you go through each and every post, as I have now done twice, you find that for the most part this program captures the bulk of what is wanted. It was even revised in September in accordance with some suggestions by the membership.

Now, after these many, many months, YOUR Board took up the matter so as to not delay it further. We have all taken the months of posts to heart. We have all discussed and re-discussed the suggestions and comments. We also made the decision, <u>unanimously</u>, to put the existing program to the membership for vote. This was not done haphazardly, nor was it done in any self-serving way. I would venture to say that there are other Board members, like myself, who in no way qualify for the Grand Master title...nor would any one of us finagle our way to such status.

This is not an elitist club that is being formed. It is an opportunity for the members to be measured against a set of established criteria. If you do not wish to be judged, there is no pressure or impetus to do so. This program is voluntary. I repeat, <u>this program is voluntary</u>. The measurements may not be to each individual's liking, but let me assure you that from the scores of posts which I have read, they are a fair and reasonable grouping and they represent our diverse membership pretty darned well. OUR Board and its predecessor committees have done a magnificent job with a near impossible task.

Now, I do not expect the members to agree with all of the endorsement program on a component-by-component basis, but I would like to remind you that WE elected these good people only a scant month or so ago. They have dedicated a significant amount of time and energy into this organization. If you believed in them enough to elect them, I believe you owe it to them to support them in a fair and reasonable manner. Agree or disagree over programs...vote with or against them in proceedings like this... but never, <u>ever</u> question their dedication. Never, <u>ever</u> look upon their actions as self-serving. I can attest to the fact that they look out for each individual member, for each one of YOU, even to their own sacrifice.

Vote your heart. Vote your mind. Then please rejoin the group which garners the largest number of votes and let's put this organization back to work for us!

 

[DCBluesman]

Drew, while I prefer to keep posts away from the personal, I find I must respond to several elements in your last post.

First, you comment "if you read the replies". I can assure you that I have read and re-read them. I believe the count of the number of replies to THIS poll who think the GMP requirements are not well thought out, is 3. Others may have nits to pick, but I only see three truly opposed comments.

In terms of your judgement that the results of 8 months of on and off work on this issue appearing to be "unreasonable, elitist, and not related to ones ability to turn a pen", as has been stated before, that was NOT the exclusive intent of the program. Service to our craft, service to our organizations and service to our community were also held to be desirable qualifications for recognition. If these qualifications appear to have all of the negative connotations that you bring up, why are the votes running 80% in favor?

As for whether or not the Board considered removing a requirement that YOU believe is bad, please be very careful where you tread on this ice. We have ALL, every Board member and every Officer, read these posts. And read them often. We know disagreements exist. The fact that you have not prevailed in your disagreement is no reason to take a pot shot at us for being "apparently unaware they existed." We know they existed. They did not outweigh the wants of the majority.

As for re-writing the by-laws, I personally have no stomach for it. A group of sincere, dedicated, knowledgeable and tallented people worked all kinds of hours to put the by-laws together. They were voted on and approved by an overwhelming majority of our membership less than four months ago. I do not know what stand others may take, but I will work vigorously to use what we have, making modifications only where it is the clear intent of the majority that changes need to be made for the preservation or betterment of the group.

As for "circling the wagons", factually speaking, there is not a single person on this Board who is too timid to speak their mind. We disagree regularly. We discuss. We debate. We deliberate. We move...move the organization forward. We do our darnedest to do it in a manner that is consistant with the desires of the majority of the members.

Speaking from a perspective of vision into the recent efforts of Scott, Jeff, Ed, Don, Daniel and Bev, I can assure you and the entire membership that they are serving the constituency with great integrity, sincerity and dedication. And I personally am offended by any comment that tries to make them out to be less.

 

[Daniel]

I served on both the by-law committe, as well as now serving on the board. I am a personal witness to the concern and conversation to meet the overall desires of this group. each and every member demonstrated there desire to represent the group. often discussions where taken up amoung the group for the direct pourpose of getting there input. discussions that the committe could very well have lived without the burdon of. the endorsment program does not reflect the desires of a few. not amoung the committe, the board or the membership. it shows what we assertained was the overall view of the entire membership. the vote so far speaks to the quality we put into that work, and the insuing discussion reflects the comments in which we had to formulate the "Group Consensus"
there are those that feel strongly at each end of this issue and then there is the middle ground. I believe that ground was squarly landed in and the groups responce is indicating that.
the Board itself could not have less power in deciding this issue. it was written before the board existed. and it's approval is up to the group. We simply got handed the responsibilty to put it up for a vote and carry out what that vote mandates.
At the time these program was written no one had time to be concerned about who would and would not be on the board. it was clear to everone that was a decision the group would make. those of us that served on the committe stressed over and over the importance of the election of there board members. that important issues would be handled by them. even with such a low turnout at the election. i have found that we have a fine group of very self sacraficing individuals. they clearly have the well being of this group foremost in there thoughts. To attack them in an attempt to shed negative light on this program is offensive to me as well. one concern that was descussed many times amoung the By-Law committe. was guarding against the ability of any minority opinion to take over the will of the group. Including the minority that constitutes the Board.

 

[Scott]

Howdy!

I thought I should post on this issue so you'd all know I was still alive!

I appreciate the lively discussion on this issue! Both sides! Drew has forcefully opposed the Grand Master portion of the program, and you know what? I respect him for that! He makes me look at things with a new perspective.

But it doesn't change the fact that I am for the Endorsement Program as it is written. Is it because I might qualify as Grand Master Exhaulted Poobah already, and I desperately want this title? I don't think so! I probably won't participate in the program unless the Board votes to participate as a means of supporting it.

I am for the program because it encourages our members to do more. To try new things and enjoy penturning more. I have no problem with any of the levels, including the Grand Master, because it gives a small reason for a person to do those things. To turn a new kind of pen. To volunteer for a demonstration or whatever if they can. In my mind it is simply a tool to help bring out the best that is in us all. Many won't need this tool, but some may. Who cares, as long as we have fun and learn a few new things!

The one thing I am not for is using the endorsement program as a marketing tool. Being set up as an educational tool does not qualify it as a certification that would mean a hoot in marketing. I would see those who use it for marketing as selling a hollow promise. There's no way we can certify your skills as a penturner from a picture you send us over the Internet!

So there's my opinion. Keep discussing this. Agree or disagree! Vote your will in this important ammendment to our By-Laws! And lets keep everything civil here - we can all learn something from each other!

Scott.

 

[jeff]

I know that we struggled with the naming of the program. We ended up with "endorsement", but following your logic, Scott (with which I completely agree), we're really not "endorsing" a member's skills. We're just recognizing an accomplishment. Perhaps calling it an endorsement gives it weight as a marketing tool, which should not be the intent.

Unless we create a category for penturning web site management, I probably won't participate either. [] I've logged way too much keyboard time and not enough chisel time lately to produce much more than an ugly pen entry!

 

[timdaleiden]

Originally posted by Scott
<br />The one thing I am not for is using the endorsement program as a marketing tool.
Scott.

Scott,

I thought that it was renamed "The Skill Recognition Program". I may have missed something though. Anyway, I don't see any reason why the program can't serve duel purposes. As you (and others) have stated, the customer is the final judge of someones work.

I agree.

OTOH, who would want a Dentist, Doctor, or Lawyer that doesn't have diploma (or certificate) on their wall?

Maybe we are all getting a bit too "worked up" about this. Some of us know that this all started with a whimsical idea proposed in an e-mail exchange. Who would have thought that it would evolve into an actual thingy?

Anyway, no matter what comes of it, and what purpose it serves, you, Jeff, and others have made this an interesting place to be.

Thank you!!!

 

[bnosie]

The Board is sending the wrong message and their lack of flexibility and unwillingness to request input from the membership resulted in their making a decision that did not place adequate value on encouraging members, whether they be a novice or an expert, to support good causes through penturning.

But Drew, Ed did request member input in this very topic:

We've heard these concerns before, but no recommendations for additional or different objective criteria have ever been proposed. If you have some ideas, please post them here.

 

[jeff]

So, Drew. Do you propose eliminating the GMP or changing the requirements? If the latter, what exactly would you suggest? A list would be great to see! THANKS.