Discussion:Constitution
Discussion page for "Constitution"
This page is for discussing changes to the proposed WHPVA constitution. Please remember to "sign" at the end using the third button from the left at the top of the editing window, or two hyphens and four "tilde" ("~"). However the "summary" field below need not be used, as this discussion page is not normally edited. Please note that this page is in principle readable by the public and could be picked up by a search engine.
Sommaire |
Board of directors (not)
In the version as of today, the term "board of directors" is used. We must clarify the term and what we actually want. In the IHPVA, the term is used for a board of named nine directors which are elected by the total membership. In the WHPVA, we are at present only 12 members, each being a person (as yet unnamed) representing a national HPV association. In my opinion, these members are not directors and should be called "board of members", "membership board", or just "board". This board should be the highest authority in the WHPVA, i.e. a majority of members has the last word (we need to define "majority" however). We do need a subset of these people to "direct" and organise the WHPVA. I would not call it the "board of directors", in order to avoid confusion. Perhaps "executive committee", which includes the chair and at least two other officers to be determined. "Officers" are special functions with the authority to manage their defined areas, but otherwise no special rights. The only WHPVA officers mentioned (but only partially named) so far are the chairman of the WHPVA, the chairman of the record committee, two further members of the record committee, and the webmaster. --Theosch 20 novembre 2013 à 11:02 (UTC)
- Indent answers to the above like here, using a colon, and sign using the button or two hyphens and four tildes --Theosch (discussion) 24 février 2014 à 19:23 (CET)
- I would disagree that the individual people are the members of the WHPVA. The national organizations are the members and the national representatives form the board. Whether to call them "directors" or "representatives" I have no preference. The board would then be a "board of representatives" or simply the "WHPVA board". --Knudjahnke (discussion) 24 février 2014 à 23:40 (CET)
Water Competition at World Championships
At present the draft proposal requires at minimum land AND water competitions at Worlds Championships. In the past only very few events have managed this. However there have often been separate water events which were then considered part of the WC "virtually". However even this is not always possibel, e.g. this year 2014. The previous (mostly German) organisers can not this year, and at the venue of the land events near Besancon this year, the French organisers have no manpower or experience to organise water events as well.
I guess there are several solutions:
- forget about the requiremen for both land and water events
- make two types of world championships, those with and those without water events
- require a world championship to include promotion of the other vehicle type, but not races. E.g. the land events must at the very least set up a boat and a few posters, or preferably show a few boats in action on a nearby stretch of water. Conversely the water events must at the very least set up a land HPV and a few posters, or preferably demonstrate a few HPVs in action.
--Theosch (discussion) 24 février 2014 à 10:31 (CET)
- My preference would be option 3. --Eteufel (discussion) 21 mars 2014 à 10:36 (CET)
Majorities for decisions
There are several options and cases for majorities:
- simple majorities of cast votes
- simple majorities of board members
- two-third majorities of cast votes or members
I want to strongly propose to have decisions taken by simple majorities (whether of cast votes inside a certain period of time or of total number of board members we should discuss) but changes to the Constitution only by a 2/3 majority. The bar for amendments and changes to the Constitution should be high, in my opinion, and a 2/3 majority is often used. This would make 8/12 votes.
--Knudjahnke (discussion) 24 février 2014 à 23:56 (CET)
- I agree. I think we need to use majorities of cast votes in both cases, as usually so few representatives respond that it is impossible to get majorities of board members. --Theosch (discussion) 25 février 2014 à 12:15 (CET)
- I agree. --Eteufel (discussion) 17 mars 2014 à 11:34 (CET)
Terms of "officers" vs. "board members"
In the current version the constitution initially says that "The term of office shall not be limited, except by the termination of membership." Further down the text it reads: "Terms of the officers of executing committees are two years and renewable after this". This caused quite some confusion on my side. Reading it several times and thinking over it I think I got the meaning: there are board members, sent from national organisations (one representative for each organisation), that do *not* get elected (never!) and whose term will never end (except for when the national organisation resigns). Furthermore, there are "officers", which *do* get elected by the board members every two years and who carry out jobs as record or rules committee members etc.
Is that correct? If so, I would suggest to get this clearer, maybe by adding a drawing, and by distinguishing strictly the terms "officers" and "board members". The first citation could for instance be changed to "The term of office of *board members* shall not be limited, ..." By the way: where do officers come from? Do they have to be board members (I don't think so)? Defining this could help distinguishing between "board members" and "officers" and make the text more readable (at least to me...). Does this make any sense?
--Eteufel (discussion) 17 mars 2014 à 11:34 (CET)
Mid-season rule changes
Basically, I can see the point of letting new rules take effect only once a year. In motor racing, for example, authorities very much try to avoid mid-season rule changes as this would very likely force participants to (re)build vehicles which is to be avoided for obvious reasons.
However, there are exceptions to this. For example, when there are accidents that reveal weak points in technical regulations, authorities try to close these by immediate rule changes. Or when participants present technical solutions, that were not intended by the authorities but offer competitive advantages (by interpreting the rules creatively), the authorities sometimes also need to react quickly. Now, I am lacking the experience to judge whether this is relevant in our case. Does the WHPVA really never need to adapt technical rules in a timely manner? Is once a year enough? Can we think of a situation where a quick reaction is necessary? I agree that we must be very careful with this but throwing away the mere possibility of quick rule changes may get into the way someday.
--Eteufel (discussion) 17 mars 2014 à 11:34 (CET)
There is some logic in avoiding changing the rules mid-season for the races, but how many of the constituent organisations are actually using the WHPVA rules?
Since it is unlikely that we are going to introduce significant rule changes I would suggest that it would be better to specify a procedure that should be followed in the event of a rule change to ensure that all member organisations are informed. Unlike motor racing we don't change the rules every year to make races more competitive!
I think we need to separate the racing and record rules as the record ones are more central to the core reasons for the existance of the WHPVA. --GNick (discussion) 19 mars 2014 à 16:56 (CET)
- I agree that member organisations should be informed about rule changes. Regarding separate rules for records and races I also agree although I think that this happens almost automatically as these overlap only partly. --Eteufel (discussion) 21 mars 2014 à 10:36 (CET)
- Edgar, on 20.4. Jürg forwarded to you (with copy to me) a document from Tillmann Lunde as separate rules additional to the constitution, but with much overlap. I guess it would be time to stick these on a new Wiki page here (clicking RulesProcedures would ask you to start a page of this name), and then everybody could edit them). --Theosch (discussion) 27 avril 2014 à 15:38 (CEST)
