# NAA Elections



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

Has anyone herd anything?


----------



## Jane (Nov 3, 2004)

Please see http://www.usarchery.org/userfiles/file/USA_Archery_Press_Release_Re_Balloting_10-26-07.pdf

Jane


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Jane said:


> Please see http://www.usarchery.org/userfiles/file/USA_Archery_Press_Release_Re_Balloting_10-26-07.pdf
> 
> Jane


so we won't know who the nominees are until we get the ballots?
Interesting


----------



## Dana K (Feb 25, 2005)

We haven't recieved a ballot yet but they were supposed to be mailed no later than yesterday. So maybe we will recieve it on Monday.


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

I wonder when everyone is going to realize that this Board change and the way candidates are selected is a substantial change in our rights requiring a vote and approval of the membership prior to the change.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Bowhunter100 said:


> I wonder when everyone is going to realize that this Board change and the way candidates are selected is a substantial change in our rights requiring a vote and approval of the membership prior to the change.


good luck with that

It is sort of like saying FDR should have obtained amendments to the constitution before imposing the New Deal:wink:


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

I suppose that is why these things happen.:wink:


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Bowhunter100 said:


> I wonder when everyone is going to realize that this Board change and the way candidates are selected is a substantial change in our rights requiring a vote and approval of the membership prior to the change.


How many alters have you created now? I know with certainty I have banned at least six of them. Man up and use your real name next time.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Recordkeeper said:


> How many alters have you created now? I know with certainty I have banned at least six of them. Man up and use your real name next time.


Yeah I thought I smelled old argyle


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Recordkeeper said:


> How many alters have you created now? I know with certainty I have banned at least six of them. Man up and use your real name next time.



Maybe its this guy?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Or this former poster?


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Jim C said:


> Or this former poster?


:thumb: I like the little lamb puppet best.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Recordkeeper said:


> :thumb: I like the little lamb puppet best.


Yeah I think Joel C gave me that one-its not too baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

Chris 
You should worry less about being a man and more about exercising your brain.
Worrying about such things puts your mind back in the stone ages.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Bowhunter100 said:


> Chris
> You should worry less about being a man and more about exercising your brain.
> Worrying about such things puts your mind back in the stone ages.


Do tell. Come out of hiding...take off your mask...show some courage. You sure do whine a lot about the NAA. Have you even paid your dues?


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

The old Bylaws were very clear that the Board of Governors could vote to change the bylaws. The Board was elected by the members, so the membership was represented in the decision. The new Bylaws were posted online for at least a month, and were also discussed some on ArcheryTalk. Only 3 or 4 members sent in comments to the NAA or their Board Members with concerns about the new bylaws, and none of them questioned the legitimacy of the vote. One major change was made from those comments, and that was the addition of the "At-Large" board member so anyone not in a constituency group would have a vote and representation.

The entire membership really needs to take this election seriously. The new board will determine the future (or demise) of our organization. Don't just vote for a popular name. Find representatives that are willing to do what it takes to get our organization moving forward in a positive direction. Perhaps ArcheyTalk could be a forum for candidates to make their positions clear, and maybe stir up some debate. We need board members that have a vision for the future of USA Archery and what our organization should and could be. They need to be willing to make hard decisions and then STAND BY those decisions and defend their actions..... I really shouldn't say more because it could get really ugly.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Lloyd said:


> The old Bylaws were very clear that the Board of Governors could vote to change the bylaws. The Board was elected by the members, so the membership was represented in the decision. The new Bylaws were posted online for at least a month, and were also discussed some on ArcheryTalk. Only 3 or 4 members sent in comments to the NAA or their Board Members with concerns about the new bylaws, and none of them questioned the legitimacy of the vote. One major change was made from those comments, and that was the addition of the "At-Large" board member so anyone not in a constituency group would have a vote and representation.
> 
> The entire membership really needs to take this election seriously. The new board will determine the future (or demise) of our organization. Don't just vote for a popular name. Find representatives that are willing to do what it takes to get our organization moving forward in a positive direction. Perhaps ArcheyTalk could be a forum for candidates to make their positions clear, and maybe stir up some debate. We need board members that have a vision for the future of USA Archery and what our organization should and could be. They need to be willing to make hard decisions and then STAND BY those decisions and defend their actions..... I really shouldn't say more because it could get really ugly.


Well said Lloyd. :thumb:


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

I am a current member and have been for a number of years. I find out about these things here, on AT, not from NAA. Does that strike anyone else as a bit unusual?

Dave

PS: And don't say I should go to their web site. Owning a computer was not listed as a requirement of membership.


----------



## Mr. Black Magic (Sep 13, 2007)

Recordkeeper said:


> :thumb: I like the little lamb puppet best.


 I dunno, maybe we should sic this guy on im


----------



## sundevilarchery (May 27, 2005)

good post Lloyd


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

*USA Archery 11-5-07*

USA Archery Nominating Committee Announces Candidates for Board of Directors
http://usarchery.org/userfiles/file...nounces_Candidates_for_Board_of_Directors.pdf


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

Section 11.8 Amendments. In relivent part! no change to these Bylaws shall eliminate a class of members of the corporation or limit or repeal the rights of any class of member, unless such change is adopted by the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of such class.

This is from the old bylaws


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Bowhunter100 said:


> Section 11.8 Amendments. In relivent part! no change to these Bylaws shall eliminate a class of members of the corporation or limit or repeal the rights of any class of member, unless such change is adopted by the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of such class.
> 
> This is from the old bylaws



and who might you be? frankly I am sick of quints, sockpuppets and other faceless posters who whine without having the guts to tell us who they are. and I don't buy for a minute the claim that if you weren't a sockpuppet you would somehow face "repercussions" from the powers that be. Such paranoia is both stupid and has no basis in fact.


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

Here is the whole section - Section 11.8 Amendments. Subject to repeal or change by action of the members, *the power to alter, amend or repeal these Bylaws and adopt new Bylaws shall be vested in the Board of Governors, provided, however, that (i) any such action by the Board of Governors shall require an affirmative vote of two thirds of the votes cast and *(ii) no change to these Bylaws shall eliminate a class of members of the corporation or limit or repeal the rights of any class of member, unless such change is adopted by the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of such class. An effort to repeal an action of the Board of Governors by the members may take place only at the annual members meeting, and can occur only upon approval by no less than two-thirds of the members present in person or by proxy.

Everyone agreed that this was ok, and it was also reviewed by the NAA and USOC lawyers as far as I know. No one questioned it at the time (ArcheryTalk doesn't count as an official means of communication within the NAA), and the members certainly had the right to repeal the action. I lived within the bylaws and died within the bylaws! I felt that changes were needed within the organization, so I took ACTION! I ran for the Board, ran for President and worked hard to get the organization moving forward. I also got shot down. But at least I tried. I put it out there and made an effort within the rules of governance. I encourage everyone to do the same. Comments on ArcheryTalk are NOT action. It's more like pissing in the wind.


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

Well Lloyd
The second part that I posted operates in control of what you have placed enfaces on. 
It is of no importance who you talked to or what you did and even less important that the USOC approved of anything. The fact is the By-Laws are there to stop this kind of self serving silliness by a few. It matters little how sincere your intentions were, what you have done is illegal under the bylaws. The fact that an apathetic membership failed to respond is equally of no importance. “An Election on the matter is required


----------



## Reo (May 23, 2002)

All I know is that this is important! We need new blood in this organation and people who want what is best for archery. This is a org that if it wasn't for the USOC they would be dead and that is just cazy. Thats because they don't work for the better of archery all they do is live off other's work. Just my thoughts but I will tell you that I have lost a ton of respect for the leaders of the NAA in the last year.

This is funny but this bowhunter 100 acts a lot like them. Does things but won't stand and say they did it. 

Reo


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

Bowhnter100,

Can you explain how the new Bylaws "eliminated a class of members" or "limited or repealed the rights of any class of member"? If the majority of members do not like the changes, then DO SOMETHING about it. I just don't think that is the case. Do whatever you can do legally to make changes. The organization needed a change in the leadership structure. This is the direction that many organizations, including the USOC and most NGB's are taking. I sincerely hope that this will move our organization forward in a positive direction. I have been a hard working member of this little club for a long time and I really want to see it thrive.


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

I repeat. Regardless of your intentions or sincere belief you cannot make a significant change like this without the approval of the membership. Further this is not an issue that the membership needs to address rather it is problem the board created in its zeal to “get what they want” overstepping its authority. The board had no lawful authority to take this action without addressing the membership. Consequently it is a fraud upon the membership. Rather than waist this association limited funds on a legal challenge why don’t you just follow the by-laws and do the right thing.


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

Again, Can you explain how the new Bylaws "eliminated a class of members" or "limited or repealed the rights of any class of member"?


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

The board has limited or repealed the rights of the membership by significantly changing/limiting the way they are represented and the means by which they gain representation. The board has demonstrated its unmitigated arrogance in deciding it should decide by “its” appointees whom is eligible to run for office. The fact that the fox always wants control of the chicken coop is nothing new in life.


----------



## Reo (May 23, 2002)

boy bowhunter 100 still just dances around the truth. Plus will not even say who they are. This is just like one of the NAA people I have delt with in the last few weeks. This is why we need new blood in there.

Reo Wilde


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

Reo 
I think you mean I refuse to engage you at your highly emotional state of mind. And you are correct I will not!

I sincerely hope you get an opportunity to “vote” for the new blood you desire.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Bowhunter100 said:


> Reo
> I think you mean I refuse to engage you at your highly emotional state of mind. And you are correct I will not!
> 
> I sincerely hope you get an opportunity to “vote” for the new blood you desire.


gutless sockpuppets should be banned unless they PM Record Keeper and make out a really good argument why they should hide behind a quint. As a long time NAA member, a coach, a club leader, a competitior and an attorney well versed in the AAPA I cannot come close to believing anyone has to hide behind a facade. IF Lloyd and Reo have the balls to post under their real names, so should this sockpuppet


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

Jim
I am not sure what your intentions are but you appear to be proving the need for that which you say is unnecessary.


----------



## utahhotshot (Nov 18, 2004)

Bowhunter 100 - I'm just curious. If you are so unhappy with what is going on, what have you done (other than post on AT) to try and change it? What has been your involvement in the NAA for the past several years?


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Jim C said:


> gutless sockpuppets should be banned unless they PM Record Keeper and make out a really good argument why they should hide behind a quint. As a long time NAA member, a coach, a club leader, a competitior and an attorney well versed in the AAPA I cannot come close to believing anyone has to hide behind a facade. IF Lloyd and Reo have the balls to post under their real names, so should this sockpuppet


I rather have to agree here. While I firmly believe in this venue as a terrific for *anyone* to express/analyze the goings on of an organizational body, when it turns to an accusatory / inflammatory dialogue some explanation of motive and or agenda should be forthcoming.


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

No question or statement presented by myself turns on any level of participation or stature in this organization. Rather it turns on my requirement (and any reasonable persons) that the members of this association abide by the rules and obey the law. 
Those of you desperate to get my name are primarily interested in attacking. Who I am has no intelligent reference to the issues discussed. Either I am correct or not period.
I doubt the more reasonable elements of the rank and file would be anything but embarrassed by these juvenile attacks.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

BH100, is it really that hard to just come out of the closet. It is easy to gush your dribble and remain a shadow. What I see here is a real lack of guts and wimpish.

It is OK to have an opinion, but character assasination, such as what you have said about Lloyd, is never ok. 

As far as I am concerned if RK bans you again, it's ok with me.

Grow up little girl...


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

OK, I apologize...I should not resort to responding to this silliness in such a manner.


----------



## Brandeis_Archer (Dec 20, 2006)

I think its time for an archery-specific sockpuppet. 


Bowhunter100, couldn't you even come up with a fake name and location, or something? Heck, you don't even put down your Zodiac sign! I mean, really, c'mon... 


(extra credit! How do we know Merona here is sinister?)


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*argue,argue*

:thumbs_do This is why i don't do more with Naa. Can't you all just get along. Agree to disagree and move on. :smile: My name is Gary Frye JOAD archery Coach


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

frydaddy40 said:


> :thumbs_do This is why i don't do more with Naa. Can't you all just get along. Agree to disagree and move on. :smile: My name is Gary Frye JOAD archery Coach


But if you are a JOAD coach, you already are involved.


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Yes*

:smile: Glad your here. Yes recordkeeper i am and this is what makes me what to quit. You can't make everyone happy all the time. I think we all know that. So we all just need to try to work together if we can. I do this for the Kids i could care less what the adults think. :smile:


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*And another thing*

:smile: The kids thay just want to shoot and have fun. Some want to compete and some don't but thay all want to have fun. When we as adults can't get along why can't have fun.:smile:


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

frydaddy40 said:


> :smile: Glad your here. Yes recordkeeper i am and this is what makes me what to quit. You can't make everyone happy all the time. I think we all know that. So we all just need to try to work together if we can. I do this for the Kids i could care less what the adults think. :smile:


We each have to decide for ourselves what is an appropriate level of involvement. In fact, if you are unhappy with the current NAA board this is your chance to participate in the election that will totally change the board.

As for what appears to be arguing and bickering here on AT, keep in mind that in large part the purpose of this forum is to serve as a format for an open exchange of opinions and ideas. And that's certainly a lot more than you're gonna get on the NAA site.


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*One more time*

:smile: Just think, if we (the member's of naa) had spent all this time on this thread trying to make thing's better (Just Think) of all we could have done! :smile:


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*no problems*

:smile: I'm a coach i worry about coaching and all that it requires , i leave the politics to someone else. But from the outside looking in from my point of view it don't look good for Naa. Look's like to much arguing to get anything done.:smile:


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Bowhunter100*

:smile: As for bowhunter100 ( A voice carry's louder when it has a name.):smile:


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Well, Well*

:smile: Miss Jane , How are you? This Gary Frye we shared some Great times at my level 3 in lake placid ny at the otc. I'm shore you can share some good things that are happening in naa in these dark times for us all.:smile: Ps The young man i tould you about AAron Henslin on my JOAD team he made it. He's on coach Lee's Dream team for 2012.:smile:


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Bowhunter100 said:


> Jim
> I am not sure what your intentions are but you appear to be proving the need for that which you say is unnecessary.


Intentions-I want people who post controversial things to have the courage to not hide behind facades, sockpuppets or quints. I know you have been banned a bunch of times and I tire of cowards. If you aren't willing to say something publicly I have no use for you. Reo, Lloyd and others don't do this nonsense, why do you? Have you been an Olympic team Coach and NAA president or a many time medalist representing the USA?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Brandeis_Archer said:


> I think its time for an archery-specific sockpuppet.
> 
> 
> Bowhunter100, couldn't you even come up with a fake name and location, or something? Heck, you don't even put down your Zodiac sign! I mean, really, c'mon...
> ...


excellent ROBIN HOSE!!!


----------



## OneBowTie (Jun 14, 2002)

interesting thread......

sure seems like bowhunter100 has some things he wants to get off his chest.....seems he wants to say it in a hidden voice.....and yet it appears that most everyone on this thread already know who he is.....

for someone that says that he doesnt want to engage reo in a emotional state ......wonder why he doesnt take his own advice and not post in the emotional state that he posts in.....

while i think that bowhunter100 has certainly shed some light on a topic that should interest the general membership of the NAA.....and he sure seems passionate about his pursuit of justice for all.....i wonder.....wouldnt you get people actually interested in your topic if you posted as a real person with real concerns.....on a topic of such accusations against a board.....either you are credible or your not.....and if your not, i certainly see hiding behind a alter.....however....if you are credible....wouldnt you get much more attention and possible support if people could attach their emotions with a real persons emotions.....there we go with emotions.....

best of luck


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

Jim C said:


> Intentions-I want people who post controversial things to have the courage to not hide behind facades, sockpuppets or quints. I know you have been banned a bunch of times and I tire of cowards. If you aren't willing to say something publicly I have no use for you. Reo, Lloyd and others don't do this nonsense, why do you? Have you been an Olympic team Coach and NAA president or a many time medalist representing the USA?


Jim
It is unusual for someone to demonstrate their limitations with so much zeal. How is it that anyone could get so upset over something so irrelevant? It’s not as though everything I have said is anything less than an obvious fact.
Why do you obfuscate.
OOXX


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Bowhunter100 said:


> Jim
> It is unusual for someone to demonstrate their limitations with so much zeal. How is it that anyone could get so upset over something so irrelevant? It’s not as though everything I have said is anything less than an obvious fact.
> Why do you obfuscate.
> OOXX


Come on why don't you tell the rest of the board what we both already know


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Bowhunter100*

:smile: If you would send this much time on coaching you be the most successful coach in the USA. What do you think?:smile:


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

frydaddy40 said:


> :smile: If you would send this much time on coaching you be the most successful coach in the USA. What do you think?:smile:


quantity sometimes cannot make up for a lack of quality


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Advice*

:smile: Lead, Follow,or get out of the way. Don't ride the fence.:smile:


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*well*

:smile: Jim, I think the cats got his tongue.:smile:


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

frydaddy40 said:


> :smile: Jim, I think the cats got his tongue.:smile:



we will get to the Root of this sock puppet's identity soon enough


----------



## Bowhunter100 (Oct 10, 2007)

Jim
There is something very wrong with you.
If you continue this I will call the police and seek a restraining order against you. You are simply too screwed up to ignore any further.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Bowhunter100 said:


> Jim
> There is something very wrong with you.
> If you continue this I will call the police and seek a restraining order against you. You are simply too screwed up to ignore any further.


And with this, you're history.


----------



## OneBowTie (Jun 14, 2002)

Bowhunter100 said:


> Jim
> There is something very wrong with you.
> If you continue this I will call the police and seek a restraining order against you. You are simply too screwed up to ignore any further.


wow....pretty weak post here.....


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Recordkeeper said:


> And with this, you're history.


Well speaking of restraining orders, one can go at an isp for one or 100:shade:


----------



## OneBowTie (Jun 14, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> Well speaking of restraining orders, one can go at an isp for one or 100:shade:



wow...im beginning to think that this thread is the root of all evil....:thumbs_do


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Cleaned up and returned. By popular demand.


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Hello yall*

 Where is sockpuppet man tonight? :embara: O Sorry Rk


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Recordkeeper said:


> Cleaned up and returned. By popular demand.


Thats all well and good. but what *was* the original topic?


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*This*



Bowhunter100 said:


> Has anyone herd anything?


 :wink:I'm sockpoppet man. Any body herd about them there Naa Elections.:wink:


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Hutnicks said:


> Thats all well and good. but what *was* the original topic?


That's a mighty good question.

I think the illusion of the original topic was an open discussion of the NAA director election process. So perhaps we can pick it up from there.


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Politics*

 Politic's , Politic's , Politic's, Man this much be FOX NEWS how'd i get here.


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Hay*

 Recordkeeper you can be Bill Oreiley, Ready go. You say the spin stop's here.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

frydaddy40 said:


> Recordkeeper you can be Bill Oreiley, Ready go. You say the spin stop's here.


I thought maybe we could be Sean Hannity and Alan Colmbs.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Recordkeeper said:


> That's a mighty good question.
> 
> I think the illusion of the original topic was an open discussion of the NAA director election process. So perhaps we can pick it up from there.


OK to that point, are there actually minimum requisites for nomination or is it completely open?


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Hutnicks said:


> OK to that point, are there actually minimum requisites for nomination or is it completely open?


It was generally open, but with specific requirements to qualify to serve as director representing the various membership groups set forth in the NAA's new bylaws.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Recordkeeper said:


> It was generally open, but with specific requirements to qualify to serve as director representing the various membership groups set forth in the NAA's new bylaws.


I guess what I'm getting at here is if there are a glut of nominees who does the initial weeding and what is the process? Does it actually go directly to a vote no matter the number of nominees?


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Hutnicks said:


> I guess what I'm getting at here is if there are a glut of nominees who does the initial weeding and what is the process? Does it actually go directly to a vote no matter the number of nominees?


Good question. The Nominating and Governance committe had the responsibility of selecting which nominees would make the ballot. That same committee also appoints the two independent directors, so this committee has great power and great responsibility.


----------



## dcell (Sep 13, 2004)

*Let's make a difference.*

Dear Friends,

As many of you may already know, I have been selected by the nominating committee as a candidate for the Board of Directors of USA Archery (Collegiate Director). If you know me, you know my passion for archery and my love for the collegiate division. In the past few years I've literally dedicated my life to it. I left a solid 10 year position in computer consulting to coach here at Columbia University and at that time, it was not yet a full time position. I've always felt the future success of archery in the US lies with our youth. We must provide strong opportunities for them to continue in the sport after JOAD. I can honestly say, Collegiate archery is the most unique, most challenging, and possibly the most rewarding phase of a persons archery career. That makes it valuable and worth investing time and resources to. In order for the US to regain it's position as a world leader in archery (and I believe we can) it will take a balanced effort on all levels and by all parties involved. I would like the opportunity to help be a part of that effort. I want to be your voice. I want to hear what you have to say and represent you in the best possible way. If anyone has any questions or concerns, I welcome them.

Sincerely
Derek Davis
Head Coach
Columbia University Women's Varsity Archery
212-854-5156
[email protected]
3030 Broadway DFCMC-1924
New York, NY 10027


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Derek is a good guy people. I have attended a HPP seminar with him and a girl (whose father and grandfather shoot with my club often) attends Columbia-Barnard. I am going to vote in the Coach division because one of the coaches in our club is running in that position (Steve Cornell) but Derek is a very good choice in the division he is running in.


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*What's Up*

 How you doing, looks like your Great ( Mr. Head Coach). We meet in Lake Placid New York , at the OTC for our level 3-4 training. You were a good man then i am shore you'll make a great (collegiate director) you had then and i'm shore still have the Visoin that we need to go forward in that area. Nice to now your still hangen in there. Archery is not the easyest thing to make a liven at. Well Keep in the X ring. Gary Frye Georgia 4-h State Archery instructure, Head coach of almost world famous (go gettem Aaron Henslin) Wayne CO. 4-H Archery Team (Georgia) PS My wife Mary said to say hello.


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Hope*

 Maybe it is'nt to late for naa after all we need more peaple like Derek D. out there in the trench's.


----------



## dcell (Sep 13, 2004)

Very solid questions Kari. Thank you.

I stated to answer them and realized it was getting kinda long. I will post my response on my personal website within 24hrs and then post a link here.

I hope they help you and others.


----------



## dcell (Sep 13, 2004)

frydaddy40 said:


> How you doing, looks like your Great ( Mr. Head Coach). We meet in Lake Placid New York , at the OTC for our level 3-4 training. You were a good man then i am shore you'll make a great (collegiate director) you had then and i'm shore still have the Visoin that we need to go forward in that area. Nice to now your still hangen in there. Archery is not the easyest thing to make a liven at. Well Keep in the X ring. Gary Frye Georgia 4-h State Archery instructure, Head coach of almost world famous (go gettem Aaron Henslin) Wayne CO. 4-H Archery Team (Georgia) PS My wife Mary said to say hello.


Hello Gary and Mary! Long time. That was a fun week. Hope all is well with you guys.

Derek


----------



## dcell (Sep 13, 2004)

*My response to Kari's questions...*

Can be read here...
http://web.mac.com/dcell/iWeb/Site/Election%20Points.html



dcell said:


> Very solid questions Kari. Thank you.
> 
> I stated to answer them and realized it was getting kinda long. I will post my response on my personal website within 24hrs and then post a link here.
> 
> I hope they help you and others.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

dcell said:


> Can be read here...
> http://web.mac.com/dcell/iWeb/Site/Election%20Points.html


Would you have any objections to having that cut and pasted into a direct post here? Weblinks can be nebulous things at times (and over time) and as it is in fact a direct response to questions here it is quite relevant.


----------



## dcell (Sep 13, 2004)

Hutnicks said:


> Would you have any objections to having that cut and pasted into a direct post here? Weblinks can be nebulous things at times (and over time) and as it is in fact a direct response to questions here it is quite relevant.


I have no problem other than the fact that I didn't want to post such a large message that would cause endless scrolling. I will post it here and if it's a problem, I'll leave it for the Recordkeeper to manage.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

dcell said:


> I have no problem other than the fact that I didn't want to post such a large message that would cause endless scrolling. I will post it here and if it's a problem, I'll leave it for the Recordkeeper to manage.


That's absoultely fine by me!


----------



## dcell (Sep 13, 2004)

*Response to Kari's questions (here on AT)*

1. A Candidate's "non-archery" background and qualifications for the position.
2. A Candidate's previous and current history and involvement with archery.
3. A Candidate's goals and ideas for the future of the NAA.
4. A Candidate's thoughts on fundraising and financial growth and responsibility for the NAA.
5. (and this one is bit touchy) A Candidate's thoughts on the HPP, USOC involvement with the NAA, and CDC.


1. Outside of archery, I spent the first half of my adult life as a recording engineer and producer of music. Then transitioned into computer tech and consulting up until 4 years ago when I began phasing into coaching. I would imagine there are many different qualities a person can gain from any series of jobs/careers. The 2 most significant I can see from my path are patience and staying power. If anyone has any idea what it takes to operate all the equipment in a major recording studio in a major market like NYC can also understand that it takes years of constant learning and adapting to the whims of creative minds. Then translate that into a technical concept and back again. All while under the gun of a clock ticking at the pace of $250/hr. All while having the diplomacy to give honest critique yet keep ones job. While not as complex, servicing the computer industry is similarly challenging. Tracking down a problem must be methodical and with reason to each step. Often I was hired by very smart people who simply knew they did not have the patience to troubleshoot properly. These lessons can be applied to any problem solving issue and yes we have problems here. Where there are large groups of people working together, there will always be problems and disagreements. But with patience, proper troubleshooting and a solidified purpose, I think they can be solved.

2. My history in archery is not as long as many (12 years). But longer than others. I think the quality is more important than the quantity. By that I mean, what you do with that time. I began shooting for recreation when I switched to a 9-5 life in computers. I met some of the most wonderful people and the social aspect of archery became just as important as the competitive side. I've competed in numerous tournament around the country including indoor and outdoor nationals and one international trip. As mentioned, I started here at Columbia in '03-'04 year as an assistant coach. I immediately went for my level 2 certification that year. At the end of the season, the head coach stepped down. With no prior coaching experience I was reluctant to go for the position, but I was encouraged by the previous coach, administration and more importantly, by the team members. At the same time I started as Head Coach, we welcomed a new Athletics Director. I have never worked with such an amazing leader and never learned as much as I have from her. With a strong focus on constant growth and development, all coaches attend various leadership and business skills training and workshops. Budgeting and fundraising are MAJOR parts of my job here. In order to do the best job I could, I negotiated this historically voluntary position into a full time position. In that first year as Head Coach, I lead the team to it's first ever National Championship win. I also achieved my level 3 certification that year. In the years to follow, I trained with Coach Lee and was named a Regional High Performance Coach in NY. Most recently I was chosen, along with Coach Sheri Rhodes, by the CAP leadership to take the collegiate all-star team to Venezuela.

Questions 3, 4 and 5 are without a doubt the most important of this query. 

3. While I know what I see and hear from the outside looking in, there is much to be learned from within the NAA which would help me answer these questions more completely. My goals and ideas are more about what I think combined with what the membership thinks we should be. Generally my goals and ideas are to see the NAA / USA Archery rise to the next level. What I mean by that is I believe it's time for archery to take a place next to other sports that are frankly, taken more serious than we are. I see no reason for Archery to not have the same prestige and popularity as sports like Golf, and Tennis. Big words that have been spoken before and no wave of a magic wand will make it a reality over night and definitely not without some growing pains. But I believe it is goal that can be accomplished if we truly want it. We need to be proactive in the early development of young athletes. School programs have been spreading and successful. Why weren't we first? Varsity College teams have come and gone and there's always plenty of outcry when a team is dropped. Where's that energy to gain new ones. We need to be more proactive and forward thinking. But to accomplish anything, we need to first take ourselves serious, then act accordingly so to gain the respect of other key figures. Which kinda leads to the next question.

4. Finance is always ever present and often not talked about. Usually because there are such wide opinions on the topic that it often leads to conflict. But it has to be dealt with. We cannot function without money. As I talked about above, the environment here at Columbia takes finances very very serious. I am responsible for my annual budget. I must justify it every year down to the penny, report quarterly to my supervisor and be fiscally responsible. Not just for my team, but the greater good of the department. Fundraising is key. We have goals (not quotas) and keep track of stewardship and it is never ending. No one likes to do it, but it's how things get done. In non-marquee sports, depending on base budget money is suicide. But again, it also depends on what we want? Constituents, members fans alumnae, whoever, will not support a cause they do not believe in or feels does not represent their interest. Investors and endorsers will not come to the table if we are not organized and fiscally responsible first. If we are happy being a backyard sport, then so be it. But there's no reason we can't be a backyard sport and financially sound in our more high level ventures.

5. In my 12 years involved with archery, I have not seen anything like the current HPP. Is it perfect? Probably not. Can it and will it improve? I think so. Will it ever satisfy everyone? Never. But it is what we have and I believe ANY plan on this level will take years to implement, track, measure and adapt and hopefully see results. I say let's give it a chance. If we have specific issues with it, then constructive input should be welcomed and considered. The USOC involvement in the NAA and the CDC seems to be based on topic number 4. This is one that I really feel I can speak better on if and when I'm on the other side of the fence. But my feeling is this... just looking through this thread alone, many feel we have done a less than stelar job on our own. Being independent of their money would not guaranty that we would have done any better in management. As I see it, we should strive to be financially independent, but we should always work WITH the USOC as a partner. We are an olympic sport. It's gone away in the past, It can go away again. We must show maturity as a sport. We must work together with ALL our partners. That includes sponsors and international organizations as well.

Bottom line, as much as I love this sport and many of the people I've met in it, I've always had the feeling that we seemed a lot like squabbling children. We must have a goal, a plan, checks and balances, and measurements. We cannot exist in a bubble. If we want to achieve more, we must work together inside and outside our organization. Sports is about people, relationships, community and yes, money. All factors must be considered in developing these goals and plans, etc. Communication is also key to everyone being on the same page. I think the number one complaint I hear is lack of information or timely information. But that too can be hindered by lack of funding. I wish I could speak more intelligently on some of these topics, but it is for these reasons I would like to serve on the board.


----------



## Bogus Election (Nov 17, 2007)

*Think*



Bowhunter100 said:


> I repeat. Regardless of your intentions or sincere belief you cannot make a significant change like this without the approval of the membership. Further this is not an issue that the membership needs to address rather it is problem the board created in its zeal to “get what they want” overstepping its authority. The board had no lawful authority to take this action without addressing the membership. Consequently it is a fraud upon the membership. Rather than waist this association limited funds on a legal challenge why don’t you just follow the by-laws and do the right thing.


Given all the statements regarding this election it is not surprising this is going on. 
If you wish to prevent the problems discussed in other strings you must also prevent the abuses “you approve of”. There is no middle ground.


----------



## Brandeis_Archer (Dec 20, 2006)

Bogus Election said:


> Given all the statements regarding this election it is not surprising this is going on.
> If you wish to prevent the problems discussed in other strings you must also prevent the abuses “you approve of”. There is no middle ground.


*yawn*

You again?


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Bogus Election said:


> Given all the statements regarding this election it is not surprising this is going on.
> If you wish to prevent the problems discussed in other strings you must also prevent the abuses “you approve of”. There is no middle ground.





Brandeis_Archer said:


> *yawn*
> 
> You again?


Good call. I'm betting we will approach a new record, as I surely don't recall ever banning anyone for the 8th time.


----------



## Bogus Election (Nov 17, 2007)

Why do you fear the truth?


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Bogus Election said:


> Why do you fear the truth?


I have no fear of truth. None. You can read my posts and you will see that I am a critic of the NAA where appropriate.

The real question is why are you a sock puppet? I sign my name. And I don't resort to personal attacks when debating issues. That's the real reason you keep getting banned.


----------



## Bogus Election (Nov 17, 2007)

Have I engaged in a personnel attack or have I attacked the factual conduct of this board. 
You on the other hand constantly attack people personally for no other reason than you disapprove of their opinions. Then you favor your perverted friends whom engage in the same.
You say do the right thing but like many that make similar statements, it all depends on your own personnel agenda.
You only need for my name is to engage in further attacks. No one can make an intelligent statement that contradicts that fact.
The truth is all you can do is rally juveniles to attack the person not the issue.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Bogus Election said:


> Have I engaged in a personnel attack or have I attacked the factual conduct of this board.
> You on the other hand constantly attack people personally for no other reason than you disapprove of their opinions. Then you favor your perverted friends whom engage in the same.
> You say do the right thing but like many that make similar statements, it all depends on your own personnel agenda.
> You only need for my name is to engage in further attacks. No one can make an intelligent statement that contradicts that fact.
> The truth is all you can do is rally juveniles to attack the person not the issue.


This is my point exactly. It took you no time at all to prove it for me.

And for the record: 1) I already know who you are...name and all, and 2) You've reached the new record.


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

******** advice*



Bogus Election said:


> Have I engaged in a personnel attack or have I attacked the factual conduct of this board.
> You on the other hand constantly attack people personally for no other reason than you disapprove of their opinions. Then you favor your perverted friends whom engage in the same.
> You say do the right thing but like many that make similar statements, it all depends on your own personnel agenda.
> You only need for my name is to engage in further attacks. No one can make an intelligent statement that contradicts that fact.
> The truth is all you can do is rally juveniles to attack the person not the issue.


 No one archerytalk believes in ghost and untill you have a name your a ghost. Thats why you keep disappearing.:wink: So if you got something to say sign in your name and will listen.


----------



## Archerone (Mar 30, 2006)

I am always questioning the NAA in my posts and I have not been banned yet! Of Course I guess they DO know the source and consider it sometimes.:wink:


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Archerone said:


> I am always questioning the NAA in my posts and I have not been banned yet! Of Course I guess they DO know the source and consider it sometimes.:wink:


*Snicker, snicker!!!*

ArcheryTalk.com encourages healthy and lively debate. In addition, we don't mind those who wish to post anonymously, as there are often very valid reasons for not disclosing one's identity. But there are rules that prohibit personal attacks and knowingly posting false information.

Actually, it's pretty darn hard to get banned.:wink:


----------



## frydaddy40 (Oct 17, 2007)

*Pick,Pick,Pick*

I pick on the NAA to i have not been ban for AT. I call it tuff love. O ya BOOOOO Scared my self that time.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Recordkeeper said:


> This is my point exactly. It took you no time at all to prove it for me.
> 
> And for the record: 1) I already know who you are...name and all, and 2) You've reached the new record.


So thats where my other sock got to been looking in the dryer all night


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

> Originally Posted by Bowhunter100
> I repeat. Regardless of your intentions or sincere belief you cannot make a significant change like this without the approval of the membership.


I think you are wrong. Because it has happened. It is done. There have been no legal challenges. The changes were made, and the election is taking place now.


----------



## straitarrow (Nov 19, 2007)

Lloyd said:


> I think you are wrong. Because it has happened. It is done. There have been no legal challenges. The changes were made, and the election is taking place now.


So if I rob a bank and get away with the money I haven’t committed a crime?


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

straitarrow said:


> So if I rob a bank and get away with the money I haven’t committed a crime?


Nine.


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

You're not following the logic. If you rob a bank and get away with the money and you are never caught, you still have committed a crime. However, I could not say that you can't rob a bank. You just did.


----------



## SuperX (May 21, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> So thats where my other sock got to been looking in the dryer all night


Come on Hutty, we all know OBT is your sock puppet - that's where that other sock went! :zip: 

Hey should I even pay attention to you since your profile is empty? :wink:


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

SuperX said:


> Come on Hutty, we all know OBT is your sock puppet - that's where that other sock went! :zip:
> 
> Hey should I even pay attention to you since your profile is empty? :wink:


Yoikes, you found me out! You know the saying empty profile, empty mind


And when did you change your sig? Who now owns the WWP title:wink:


----------



## SuperX (May 21, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> Yoikes, you found me out! You know the saying empty profile, empty mind
> 
> 
> And when did you change your sig? Who now owns the WWP title:wink:


I'm not giving up the title yet, just switchin' to glide for the moment!


The beat goes on regards,


----------

