Square,

If it makes you feel any better, I am no longer on the BOD. Partly because of the comments that I made on Texags.

Student Bonfire is an organization that allows anyone that has the desire and drive to become a leader. Male OR female.

If you have a question of why there is a perceived reduction of female leaders, you may want to call a Senior Red-pot. They will talk to you and explain the decisions being made.

Since Bonfire has been off campus, there were Female Leaders and rightly so. They were strong willed women that cared strongly for the future of Bonfire. Some wore the same color pots as the Greys (in 2002, early 2003), others did not. All leaders had jobs to do and cared for the future of Bonfire.

quote:

---

of whom were you speaking of?

---

No one at all involved with SB. I was mentally picturing particular incompetent boss I had last summer. I signed on for part time work (explicitly stated less than 30 hours/week) and I ended up working 40+ hours a week. I liked the money, but I had no free time.

When I put in my two weeks notice, 5 others (on a staff of around 20) followed suit in a matter of days. I felt kinda bad, but the manager was just no good at their job.

Slim, I fully believe that you being reprimanded by the board for your comments was just and fair, and I have others around me who believe the same, one of them, a woman with an extensive tenure in a upper managerial position. Comments like your's are the reason that board members shouldn't speak in public. It's unfortunate though, the decision makers in/of an organization should be heard. However when they can't say anything worth hearing or the things that they have to say are blatantly sexist or offensive...well then the organization puts the kabosh on that, don't they?

About these decisions being made, remember, I live with a Senior Green, and if she is for some reason out of the loop as far as the decisions being made regarding her leadership position, then shame on ASB for operating in such a manner. I'd like to say I talked to my Senior Green, but she's just a Green now.

That's good that there has been a history of female leaders within the organization, but you know well that the numbers don't quite measure up, and again, I bring your comments to light in saying that you are not the only one who regards women and female leaders in such a way.

quote:

---

and I have others around me who believe the same, one of them, a woman with an extensive tenure in a upper managerial position

---

Just for the record, he's not referring to me. Terry and I haven't discussed this action at all.

quote:

---

-->telling people that bc they haven't been involved in a couple years that they don't matter and don't have an opinion.

---

The 3 years comment was not aimed at stating how much time has passed since somebody was last involved with Bonfire...but to note that they have not been involved for the length of time necessery, according to the bylaws, to get a vote to decide the direction that Student Bonfire will travel. Any and all members are allowed to go to the annual meeting...but only those that meet the requirements in the bylaws are allowed to vote...simple as that...only biased toward those that are involved...

What Jayci says is true, we haven't discussed this matter or anything close to it at all.

Secondly, I would venture to say that there are people "involved" with the organization that don't know some of the things I do, so I don't think experience in the organization should be the sole determinant of a vote.

As I stated earlier, the viewpoint of a non-biased objective 3rd party can be extremely helpful, especially to an upstart organization whose members seem to be blinded by the past glory of what they're trying to recreate and the vast potential that lies ahead, rather than the challenges currently being faced.

quote:

---

..but only those that meet the requirements in the bylaws are allowed to vote...

---

you pay your membership dues, and you have to be a junior or older. those are the two requirements. i am positive of this.

Interesting...

Things change Jayci...

and if the "years involved" clause hasn't been implemented yet it needs to be...

I can know more about the democratic party than the next guy...but since I'm not part of it, and am outspoken about my disdain for it...allowing me to vote for their primaries would be hazardous to their health.

but maybe you can see something that they can't...? checks and balances.

If you're implying that I have disdain for ASB, then you are incorrect.

Why does the clause "need to be implemented"? Would it have anything to do with the fact that new people could come in and change the way things work? Maybe you shouldn't be in favor of changing the rules so things work out your way.

[This message has been edited by SquareOne07 (edited 5/22/2007 10:42p).]

Also, it is possible that in situations like this one, the "years involved" clause would only serve to protect the current leadership structure, whether it's entirely effective or not. You cannot deny that bonfire culture promotes the "good ol' boy" way...a way that as slim and others have demonstrated holds women to a different standard.

The more years you are in an organization around people who thing that women are incapable, outsiders ought to be shunned, and "my way is the only way...dammit", the more inclined you are to turn out the same way. And what purpose would this serve in only allowing like minded people to vote?

i don't necessarily think that it's fair to hold one person's verbal vomit responsible for the entire organization. he has apologized and serious action has been taken in response, so maybe that in itself reflects the organization's mindset...or the leadership anyway.

that being said, i agree with whatever else you said about the groupthink that occurs once you've been integrated in regards to "what's best" for the organization. i think that someone that has experienced the organization for a burn season ought to be just as capable of voicing their opinion as an elder. new people bring new ideas.

I agree with what you said about one person's word vomit. If I had no previous experience about this then perhaps I'd see things differently, but I've been exposed to more than a few guys out there whose behavior is disturbing at best.

Just prior to my last involvement though, there was one soon-to-be leader who would boast to any and all about how he shacked up with some pregnant married girl in his truck at a party...a bonfire related party at that. This is an extreme case, but it certainly isn't my first exposure to men out there being much more like boys then gentlemen.

That being said, all members CERTAINLY cannot be lumped under that umbrella, no way. But you all know how it is, guilt by association, especially those associated with those at the top of an organiztion.

woman power!

shut up or I'll go impregnate you in a dirty old truck somewhere you girl.

lol oh my god. i'm glad you're home this week or else that might be an awkward kitchen moment.

dangit, i mentioned the kitchen on a women leadership thread.

so, back to the topic...

i know of one female yellow pot in my time with bonfire, which has only been for the past 3 years. from what i hear from her elders and from her crew, it did not work out very well. it probably did not having anything to do with her being a girl, but rather her incapabilities of a responsible, trustworthy, leader. as a chief/chair i think she was held in high regard, but as soon as she got the pot, i think it went to her head. not to say that that doesn't happen to boy upon boy, because it certainly does. i think i kicked her pot out of the fire a couple of times after a dorm stole it and tried to burn it repeatedly. i thought that was inconsiderate and none of their business, but then again what business of it was mine to try and save it? regardless, she didn't work out. but that was up to her own dorm to strip her pot and deal with it.

allowing anybody to vote, regardless of involvement is not healthy. The reasons go both ways...

first you have the counter-voters such as []1 who would just make a mockery of the entire process and always nominate and then vote for the absolutely most unpopular choice...never in the best interest of the organization.

Then you have the "What Bonfire is supposed to be" voters, who in their trying to blindly make things follow the stories and advice of "ol' army" they forget that times are different and don't always look at how things will cause the future to disappear.

T, I'm starting to see that you just have no clue what the direction of Bonfire should be...

Hey V, isn't that how we vote here in the United States? Pretty much...yeah.

And if you think I would only be in it to sabotage the entire process, then you've lost it for real. You seem to be speaking out of paranoia rather than reason and it's quite evident.

You're making it more and more clear that the only people who should be permitted to vote in your little boys' club elections are those who won't change a thing...mostly out of fear. Sounds great to me!

Get real, all concerned people should have a say in the matter, not just those who have taken the bait and would do anything the organization expected of them in the first place.

By the way, feel free to call me Terry. Don't worry, I won't go off and try to get you banned for something silly like that.

[This message has been edited by SquareOne07 (edited 5/25/2007 3:17a).]

Oh, and you can call me Terry by the way. Don't worry, I won't run off and try to get you banned for something silly like addressing me by my name.

If you guys had been seriously paying any attention to Terry's posts, instead of disregarding them as "trolling," (not saying that ALL of them are serious, his attempt to hack off posters on this forum is pretty evident)then maybe you might read into the fact that he is trying to give opposing views not to sabotage the organization or to cause a ruckus, but to make people think about why things are the way they are and to put into question the methods and patterns in which things are handled in the organization. He's trying to make you question "your beliefs" and maybe see if there is a better way for things to be done.

Only then, once you've really dug deep into "your belief" (aka the way things are handled in bonfire) can you know that it is the best way to do things. And don't any one of you say that you already have and that you know things are the best they could possibly be, because no organization anywhere can go without critique or improvement.

His mouthy efforts are not to "stir the pot" in a destructive sort of way, but rather in a productive sense of opening up minds to other possibilities.

[This message has been edited by Ellemenoquo (edited 5/25/2007 12:28p).]

Is Terry Square107? He has some valid points but a "unique" way of presenting them. I think he likes to stir up the dust and then see what settles and what doesn't. Those with short tempers usually give him some fuel for the fire. More level headed individuals should be able to spot this and respond accordingly (or maybe not at all).

quote:

---

He's trying to make you question "your beliefs" and maybe see if there is a better way for things to be done.

---

and then when the explination is given, and the reason that the topic is not up for questioning is layed out he continues to question...

this does nothing more than annoy anyone in leadership, and since he does not even acknowledge that maybe the things he brings up HAVE already been considered and dismissed, or addressed, or just simply disappeard or are not really an issue...he makes anybody that doesn't already have that much knowledge about Bonfire or the way things work dumber.

Bonfire leadership does not officially post on texags...and when people only read the crap that []1 and Elemen are posting they are left to believe that there are disrespectful, hick, idiots that are trying to burn a forest once a year.

...which is probably what folks like them would like to belive...

And don't tell me that this fecal matter is what Texags is for...take a stroll over to any other board and begin asking refuse questions like this and then call eachother to find out who got banned first...

for example...go badmouth or question the methods of CSPD on the Aggieland board...or open the worlds eyes to elementary questions they may not have considered on the football board and then answer any responses 3 days later when you can post again...Join the bandwagon and visit the baseball board and post how a .500 record is a horrible thing for us...banned again.

This board needs Bonfire moderators...if nothing else to keep things optimistic and not full of thread after thread of some guy who quit Bonfire complaining about how dumb leadership is...

EDIT

quote:

---

If you guys had been seriously paying any attention to Terry's posts, instead of disregarding them as "trolling,"

---

That would be the problem now wouldn't it...folks like Andy Kaufman tried that, and the day he died nobody thought he was serious...

It's the backseat driving posts that did it for me...when he had all of the questions about Burn night and parking, but none of the answers...nor did he even consider that every last one of the questions he asked, and then some, had been considered, weighed for probability, feasability, advantage, and disadvantage, and then a decision had already been made.

I mean come on...if you treat me like an idiot, talk down to me, and assume that I'm not smart enough to think of the first question that comes to anybody's mind...I'm not going to be very nice.

and T, you can't say that you weren't warned before I got you banned...if this forum was only for paid aggie memebers, I'd me almost fine with my real name on it...but since it is free and open to anyone...not a chance.

[This message has been edited by TexasRebel (edited 5/25/2007 10:44p).]

Oh no, your name out in public, what a horrible thing to even imagine! Give me a break.

Next, I'm too drunk and tired to even respond to much of your drivel and whining, but this part stuck out to me like a sore thumb:

quote:

---

This board needs Bonfire moderators...if nothing else to keep things optimistic and not full of thread after thread of some guy who quit Bonfire complaining about how dumb leadership is...

---

Again, you seem to be speaking out of fear moreso than out of reason. You would love to have "bonfire moderators" that way the ideas within the organization could be kept that way and you could continue to be resistant to change.

I insist, call me Terry, it's my name, and believe it or not, I'm proud of the legacy I've left not only here but elsewhere as well.

But your nonsense about bonfire sabatours is nothing more than paranoia and fear, your afraid of somebody coming in and making positive changes to an organization, and becuase of that, I believe you are not preserving your organization, but holding it back. Interesting arguments and assumptions could be made from that, don't you think?

And I'll go on record yet again saying that I don't want to see bonfire or ASB perish, I want to see it do well. But I want to see it do well the right way.

"Bonfire Moderators" need not be associated with Bonfire...but moderators that are assigned to the Bonfire board...like the ones in Aggieland, Baseball, Football, and General...

it's interesting how you read my posts and hear whining in your head, T...