Difference between revisions of "Talk:Board Policy on Events"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
IMO a policy should be definite. The short version could be: All events must be reviewed and approved by the board. A longer version: Events ab&c are prohibited. Events xy&z may be allowed with board approval. [[User:Mskilton|Mskilton]] ([[User talk:Mskilton|talk]]) 06:50, 17 July 2015 (CDT) | IMO a policy should be definite. The short version could be: All events must be reviewed and approved by the board. A longer version: Events ab&c are prohibited. Events xy&z may be allowed with board approval. [[User:Mskilton|Mskilton]] ([[User talk:Mskilton|talk]]) 06:50, 17 July 2015 (CDT) | ||
| − | Understood. It was written this way because we really didn't want the Board to formally review and approve each event. 99.999% of events are fine, so this would add to Board workload and bureaucracy with little benefit. The intent was to keep the status quo as much as possible, but give the Board a "break glass in case of emergency" option to deal with the 0.001% that are problems. I would like to see a page not part of the official policy that informally states things that could make an event not OK. (E.g. public place of amusement tax -> we can't charge for admission for parties; lack of liquor license -> we can't sell drinks; insurance requirements around "events" -> parties should be OK, but we have to file a form with the insurer in advance, someone might need to pay a small amount of money, and we need to figure out if this will come out of one of the space's budgets, or if the organizer will need to pay for it.) --[[User:Rdpierce|Rdpierce]] ([[User talk:Rdpierce|talk]]) 07:23, 17 July 2015 (CDT) | + | Understood. It was written this way because we really didn't want the Board to formally review and approve each event. 99.999% of events are fine, so this would add to Board workload and bureaucracy with little benefit. The intent was to keep the status quo as much as possible, but give the Board a "break glass in case of emergency" option to deal with the 0.001% that are problems. I would like to see a page not part of the official policy that informally states things that could make an event not OK. (E.g. public place of amusement tax -> we can't charge for admission for parties; lack of liquor license -> we can't sell drinks; insurance requirements around "events" -> parties should be OK, but we have to file a form with the insurer in advance, someone might need to pay a small amount of money, and we need to figure out if this will come out of one of the space's budgets, or if the organizer will need to pay for it.) Additionally, the policy was written like this to limit the Board's authority. We do not want the Board censoring events for content. This made it clear that the Board can step in only in very limited circumstances. --[[User:Rdpierce|Rdpierce]] ([[User talk:Rdpierce|talk]]) 07:23, 17 July 2015 (CDT) |
Revision as of 12:25, 17 July 2015
This reads as the board giving itself voting authority and not as a policy. Mskilton (talk) 22:05, 16 July 2015 (CDT)
The policy is that the board has voting authority. Somebody needs the authority to say that an event is illegal, that it would kill our ambitions for 501(c)(3), that the advertising needs to be changed because it says we're doing something illegal, or that our insurance requires a separate endorsement to cover this so we need you to cover the extra cost. It makes sense for the Board to do this. We actually did have an issue in the past. Someone advertised an event that said we were selling liquor. (We have no liquor license, so this is very illegal.) A Board member asked the person to change it. Fortunately the person complied, because without the policy, the person could have ignored the Board. --Rdpierce (talk) 23:46, 16 July 2015 (CDT)
I fully understand why the policy was created. Just don't think it's written well. IMO a policy should be definite. The short version could be: All events must be reviewed and approved by the board. A longer version: Events ab&c are prohibited. Events xy&z may be allowed with board approval. Mskilton (talk) 06:50, 17 July 2015 (CDT)
Understood. It was written this way because we really didn't want the Board to formally review and approve each event. 99.999% of events are fine, so this would add to Board workload and bureaucracy with little benefit. The intent was to keep the status quo as much as possible, but give the Board a "break glass in case of emergency" option to deal with the 0.001% that are problems. I would like to see a page not part of the official policy that informally states things that could make an event not OK. (E.g. public place of amusement tax -> we can't charge for admission for parties; lack of liquor license -> we can't sell drinks; insurance requirements around "events" -> parties should be OK, but we have to file a form with the insurer in advance, someone might need to pay a small amount of money, and we need to figure out if this will come out of one of the space's budgets, or if the organizer will need to pay for it.) Additionally, the policy was written like this to limit the Board's authority. We do not want the Board censoring events for content. This made it clear that the Board can step in only in very limited circumstances. --Rdpierce (talk) 07:23, 17 July 2015 (CDT)