Hey Wrenchbender,
You do have some good thoughts. My view on the editor change is it was justified. I don&#039;t have all the info, and doubt I ever will, but the info I do have supports the action. That is not to say it couldn&#039;t, or shouldn&#039;t had been done differently. My major objection is the former editor had no road map to go by concerning offenses. Just reprimands, no definate end, and no sensible person will go out and jump off a cliff, but anybody can step in quicksand if it isn&#039;t marked. You die either way. I feel either party could have prevented this, so, both should share blame. I have asked a termination policy be included in the bylaws, so far I have not gotten much support for this. If we would have had this road map, perhaps things would be different now. I also understand the Loseys had a very short timeframe to organize their new job, and to get the glitches out. I strongly support a magazine committee, it is a standing committee we very much need. This post office deal points that out. I stand by my opinion that no one person, including myself, is so important that the organization ceases to function if that person is lost. As such, each committee should be current on all things that the committee is responsible for, including service providers, such as bulk mailing permits. Personally, I like slower transitions, and am reluctant to change, most times it doesn&#039;t happen that way though. I encourage your participation on the Bylaws Forum, perhaps with member input we can come up with better things, and look forward to a bright future!!!