APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2007-12 > 1197054267


From: "Wanda Samek" <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Ethical Membership
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:04:27 -0600
In-Reply-To: <200712071513.lB7FCZbi011505@mail.rootsweb.com>


Well stated, Melinde.

Organizations are only as effective as their members permit them to be. It
takes members who are willing to step forward, express their concerns, and
push for positive change when change is needed to make a society strong and
progressive. Member participation is needed to keep an organization
vibrant.

Some of the issues we are trying to discuss do not lend themselves to an
electronic format (at least there are limitations). The entire structure of
APG is a complicated topic, and we seem to be skimming the surface on that.
The organization's purpose and objectives are priority considerations.
Identifying precisely whom APG will serve is a guiding factor. Those
determinations are weighty and require research and background information
as well as strategic planning.

Ethical questions are worthy of debate, but actual transgressions alledgedly
committed by specific individuals cannot properly be discussed in an open
forum.

Of course, there are those whose works should not be reproduced as there are
articles that should not be printed even though the authors are well known.
The decision should be made, however, by those authorized and entrusted to
do so, i.e., a subject matter expert panel, editorial committee, or editor.


Executive committees are ordinarily established to take care of pressing
matters between meetings of the board or when it is not feasible to call the
board together. They are not usually empowered to make decisions on ethical
complaints, editorial content, or decisions of a policy-making nature;
rather, they conduct the business of the organization following guidelines
established by the board, the bylaws, and/or administrative policies.

The primary issues that I see coming out of this discussion have to do with
structure, power (sense of ownership), and compliance with policy.

Wanda Samek



-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:] On Behalf
Of Melinde Sanborn
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 9:12 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [APG] Ethical Membership


I thank Jake for his measured response to Richard's questions. His
optimistic tone bodes well for the future of APG.

There were things in my original post that I hoped were hypothetical, but
turn out to be true. Likewise, I got the responsible party in the Chapter
member suspension wrong - it was not an EC decision. The chronic bylaws
delay was not caused by logo-fascination, although it may have contributed.

There are times when pulling email is warranted, IMO. A valid example would
be something not covered by free speech principles.

There are times when pulling an article is warranted, IMO. A valid example
would be plagiarism or something that would bring liability charges against
the publisher, as Jeff mentions in the Forum.

There are times when removing a speaker is warranted, IMO. A valid example
would be pornographic content victimizing children.

We do not need specifics to discuss the principles. We do need the
participation of our EC and Board, and I thank those who have stepped
forward to guide the conversation.

Melinde






.

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in
the subject and the body of the message




This thread: