Responsibility For Elders

Does the constitution currently make clear who is responsible for communication with OUSFG Elders? In particular, the case where long-departed elders write and say "hello, i was in OUSFG ...". At present, it doesn't seem that anyone writes in reply.

Obvious (and not so obvious) candidates for the responsibility-holder include:

I think we've got quite enough committee posts as it is. I'd go with it being the Haggard One or the OUSFG President, personally. -- NH

This doesn't really work at the moment though, with the OUSFG President behind the Iron Curtain. We probably should have appointed a Special Vice-president or something last Trinity, who could do the President's job without having to fulfil Proctoral Regulations, and so prevent the Secretary and Treasurer being so overwhelmed. -- WJR

We could make it constitutionally some particular person's responsibility, but leave them with the power to delegate (in fact, we should probably assume that everyone has the power to delegate at all times, as was mooted concerning OUSFG Punch).

How about making it the responsibilty of the "committee" with it defaulting to whichever of the President or Secretary that either has time, or is interested in writing to the person. We DO NOT NEED A COMMITTEE POST FOR THIS.

The entire problem of making it 'the committee''s collective responsibility is that everyone assumes someone else is doing it. The power to delegate is implicit, and it doesn't necessarily have to be a new Committee post, but the basic reason for this debate was that events have shown that responsibility should be nominally attached to a specific person. Oh, and using upper-case for emphasis in a Wiki world looks really ugly. -- WJR Unless done properly. Now fixed. -AM

If the problem is that the committee are disorgnaised then it is the job of the President as leader of the society/committee. It is their ultimate responsibility for checking everything works anyway.

The trouble is that we have an absentee President... if we just stick our heads in the sand and say 'The President should be doing it' we'll come unstuck. We really, really should have elected a Vice-President- we would have had enough members, since the advantage of a Veep is that they can function as a President for a Student Society without having to be a Student themselves. -- WJR

This is a current case. This is not a general society thing. I suggest the committee elect a vice-president from amung themselves. Are you saying that there shouldn't be anything that is the president's responsibilty because we have an absentee this year? I doubt it. So why does this year's president being away mean that it can't be the president's job to organise the committee into replying to letters from old members?

No, but I am saying there shouldn't be anything which is exclusively the President's responsibility this year. Describing something as a 'current case' rather than a general society thing does not lessen its importance- in fact, it increases it, since it is the current case in which we are living. I'm not sure what you mean by 'the committee elect a vice-president from amongst themselves'- I agree, there's no reason to enshrine it in the constitution (although, generally speaking, a Veep is rather useful), but, at this time, the requirement for things to get done is of higher priority than the requirement to keep the constitution uncluttered. -- WJR

So get on with it rather than mentioning it here. Surely the committee have email, why not use that to elect a VP??

Surely "this year" ends in a week or 2? And then we have a new, presentee president who can do it or delegate it to their hearts content? Though I think it should be the Haggard one's responsibility anyway... --DM

Category Constitution

Thu, 06 Mar 2003 14:53:53 GMT Front Page Recent Changes Message Of The Day