Anonymous

Changes

From Pumping Station One
Line 15: Line 15:     
I moved this text into the main vote page --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 13:40, 16 October 2014 (CDT)
 
I moved this text into the main vote page --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 13:40, 16 October 2014 (CDT)
      
== From the list ==
 
== From the list ==
Line 43: Line 42:  
*** I don't see that. The supplemental wiki page lists 5, same as the existing policy. (Ryan)
 
*** I don't see that. The supplemental wiki page lists 5, same as the existing policy. (Ryan)
 
****  Fair.  Across the board, no attendance is not lowered.  Attendance requirements are special cased where 5 people is impractical or untenable. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 18:29, 17 October 2014 (CDT)
 
****  Fair.  Across the board, no attendance is not lowered.  Attendance requirements are special cased where 5 people is impractical or untenable. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 18:29, 17 October 2014 (CDT)
      
== Complexity ==
 
== Complexity ==
Line 160: Line 158:  
*  A frightening prospect indeed.  The opposite could also be said, sessions that are too long may be perceived as too intimidating, or cause people to stop paying attention. (This point is moot)
 
*  A frightening prospect indeed.  The opposite could also be said, sessions that are too long may be perceived as too intimidating, or cause people to stop paying attention. (This point is moot)
 
*  I'm hoping no one is trading safety for a relatively small discount on membership dues --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 21:57, 20 October 2014 (CDT)
 
*  I'm hoping no one is trading safety for a relatively small discount on membership dues --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 21:57, 20 October 2014 (CDT)
      
== Classes ==
 
== Classes ==
Line 188: Line 185:     
A class has traditionally been loosely defined, and are not generally hands on.  That said, what you describe sounds awesome, I am open to rewarding preperation. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 22:00, 20 October 2014 (CDT)
 
A class has traditionally been loosely defined, and are not generally hands on.  That said, what you describe sounds awesome, I am open to rewarding preperation. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 22:00, 20 October 2014 (CDT)
 +
 +
==== Another thought ====
 +
 +
Under the policy as written, the Board gets to decide how to award points, so we don't exactly need to codify this. I'd disagree that hands-on is part of the definition; classes can be both. Generally I'd say that a class:
 +
 +
* Is taught by an instructor knowledgeable in the subject.
 +
* People are coming to get instruction, knowledge, assistance, and/or tutoring from the instructor.
 +
* The spotlight is largely on the instructor.
 +
* There's a good chance the instructor will have needed to prepare for the class at some time in the past outside of advertising it.
 +
 +
An event is something else on the calendar that isn't a class. Movie night, game night, etc. Again, just my $0.02, and this doesn't have to be part of the policy, and it probably shouldn't.
 +
 +
If the person hosting "Everyone make a wooden whatever" is, say, providing plans for people, may have acquired materials, and is coaching them through making the wooden whatever, it's a class. If the person organizing it is just responsible for advertising it and unlocking the door, and the individuals are making their whatevers without help from the organizer, then it's an event. --[[User:Rdpierce|Rdpierce]] ([[User talk:Rdpierce|talk]]) 23:46, 30 November 2014 (CST)
    
=== Change request for classes ===
 
=== Change request for classes ===
 
2. In that same section, for classes change "5 or more people" to a lower number. We originally suggested 1, but if 2 or 3 is needed to reach a compromise, we can support that. (Elizabeth and Ryan)
 
2. In that same section, for classes change "5 or more people" to a lower number. We originally suggested 1, but if 2 or 3 is needed to reach a compromise, we can support that. (Elizabeth and Ryan)
   −
* I prefer to deal with this case by case.  For classes without material preparation or that can be done completely concurrently (math, programming, writing, etc) I prefer to keep the default at 5, and lower the requirement case by case. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 22:49, 20 October 2014 (CDT)
+
* I prefer to deal with this case by case.  For classes without material preparation or that can be done completely concurrently (math, programming, writing, etc) I prefer to keep the default at 5 for most classes and first time classes, and lower the requirement case by case. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 22:49, 20 October 2014 (CDT)
    
== Donations ==
 
== Donations ==
Line 215: Line 225:     
* Overall the lack of benefit to area hosts, and the vagueness of an area hosts realm of responsibility, I'm opting to nix the discussion altogether.  That said, If an Area Hosts comes up with a good reason to change this, I'm listening.  I mostly just don't see the point.
 
* Overall the lack of benefit to area hosts, and the vagueness of an area hosts realm of responsibility, I'm opting to nix the discussion altogether.  That said, If an Area Hosts comes up with a good reason to change this, I'm listening.  I mostly just don't see the point.
 +
*. (Ryan) Under the policy language, change the Eligibility section to remove the statement "Area hosts are not eligible for member points." There is already language in the Area Hosts and Volunteer Positions policy that will suffice.
 +
 +
=== Reconsidering my stance ===
 
* several people have expressed that they feel area hosts should be able to get points for doing stuff outside there area.  I, need to reconsider my stance on this. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 21:54, 20 October 2014 (CDT)
 
* several people have expressed that they feel area hosts should be able to get points for doing stuff outside there area.  I, need to reconsider my stance on this. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 21:54, 20 October 2014 (CDT)
*. (Ryan) Under the policy language, change the Eligibility section to remove the statement "Area hosts are not eligible for member points." There is already language in the Area Hosts and Volunteer Positions policy that will suffice.
+
 
 +
==What's the Cost?==
 +
How much do we / should we spend on member points?
 +
* We allowed for $7200 or 240 member points in our 2014 budget. Any idea of how many points have already been awarded this year?
 +
*Could the board award more points than allowed for in the budget? Mskilton
 +
 
 +
So far this year, according to the board meeting minutes, we've issued 133 member points. --[[User:Dbever|Dbever]] ([[User talk:Dbever|talk]]) 14:54, 22 October 2014 (CDT)
833

edits

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.