I've pretty much stayed on the side, attempting to soak the discussion of good Ole Number 11 in before saying much beyond inserting a snippet here and there. The thought that comes to mind is simply that we need to determine, once again, which poison we want to take. If we choose the "be-very-cautious-in-choosing-elected-officials position, we will risk loosing a "few good candidates" over the years. If we choose the "more open approach" most commonly used in corporate America today, we will need to address potential recusals and under-representations along the way. I see no major problem with either approach. What I suggest is that the way in which the rule is managed is more important than the form of the rule when it comes to meeting the needs of the organization and its members. Either type of rule as these are being discussed would be quite adequate. To go one step further, I'd think we may wish to explain to our members just prior to each election just what the prevailing rule is, what it means and how it is enforced Having armed the members with this information, I think we might just avoid some of the difficulties we've had recently with with Ole No. 11. But, then, I always prefer to err on the side of entrusting an enlightened membership to make the correct decisions most of the time. And this is the way it is on lightning hill in Mason, Ohio. Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je@arrl.org; Tel: 513-459-0142 ARRL Great Lakes Division ARRL, the Reason Amateur Radio is! Members, the Reason ARRL is! -----Original Message----- From: Kay Craigie [mailto:n3kn@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 8:40 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: Wade's thoughts on Article 11 I think Wade's analysis hits the target dead-center and covers the ground very well, if you'll pardon a mixed metaphor on a Monday morning. The concept of a code of ethics that Rev brought up is a separate issue, because people who have passed through the Article 11 screening process and been elected to the Board can still conduct themselves in ways that harm the League -- leaking confidential information, for example, or promoting public opposition to policy voted by the Board, or bullying/harrassing staff. It may be worthwhile trying again to compose a clear statement of where the lines are that must not be crossed. That, as I said before, depends on whether or not we have the will to adopt a code that's consequential rather than decorative. 73 - Kay N3KN