Good afternoon Everyone, I wholeheartedly agree with Mike's sentiments and, frankly, cannot imagine a supportable rationale for dual lists. Regards es 73, Jim, K6JAT Pacific Div VD -- Sent from my Palm Pre raisbeck@comcast.net wrote: Hi All, The time has come again to chat about the role of Vice Directors in general, and the use of separate OD and ODV email lists in particular. Clearly several Vice Directors were a bit annoyed that they found out about the Dennis Dura situation third hand. So was I. Dave offered an apology, and I please understand that I completely accept it. It’s easy to make such a mistake – I do these things often enough myself – and when situations such as this erupt there is a lot going on to distract all parties. So, there is no blame to be had and no reprimand due on anyone’s part. However, it does point up a systemic issue. This problem would have been most unlikely if there weren’t separate OD and ODV mailing lists. Why do we have them? The primary function of a Vice Director is to be fully ready to step in to cover for an absent director. As such, Vice Directors would be most effective if they were privy to all the same information that Directors see. I have brought this issue up a few times in private conversations, and frankly, I have never received what I feel is a convincing response. The answers I’ve gotten seem to boil down to the following 3 themes: 1. There are certain things so sensitive that only Directors should know them 2. There are certain matters that would be so embarrassing if they got out that it is imperative to limit the exposure 3. There are certain matters that by law should only be revealed to Directors All of these arguments strike me as specious. So, I call for the two lists to be merged. Whether this means eliminating OD or adding the Vice Directors to it is unimportant. I would also ask, since the Dennis Dura matter was clearly a mistake, that someone forward all the relevant OD-only emails to ODV so we can all have a look. If there is not pretty universal consensus that merging the lists is the right thing to do, then we’ll need a discussion. In that case, I would call upon Dave, Joel, perhaps Chris to prepare a clear, crisp justification for maintaining separate lists. In the case that this be the path we take, I offer the following guidance: 1. The answers must be specific. I’m not interested (and I doubt any other Vice Directors are, either) in a “well there are just things that Vice Director’s shouldn’t know” answer. What things? Why? Why are these things that all Directors should know, as opposed to just a subgroup – EC, perhaps, or Election Committee? 2. Potential for embarrassment is irrelevant. For serious enough matters, anything on OD is likely to be discoverable anyway, and the track record of the Directors in keeping secrets isn’t, as best as I can tell, any better than the track record for Vice Directors. 3. If there are legal issues, then let’s have a full discussion of them – this is where you come in, Chris. Frankly, I doubt that there are. Note that the voting authority of the Vice Directors is automatic – if the Director is unavailable the Vice Director gets to vote, period. It isn’t an option. Of course, there is nothing to stop Directors, Vice Directors, or anyone else from maintaining their own personal email lists, and I’m sure there are plenty of these around, most for perfectly honorable reasons. Insofar as communication to the entire Board is concerned, however, I call upon the Board to establish and state as a matter of policy that all communications to the entire board should include Vice Directors as well as Directors. Thoughts? 73, Mike K1TWF NW Vice Director