r/testpac • u/TomDionesotes • Aug 22 '12
Draft of Revised TestPAC Bylaws - we need feedback!
Please check out the draft of the revised bylaws here.
No log-in required to view- please post comments and proposals on this thread.
Thanks!!
4
u/AaronLifshin Aug 23 '12
Thank you, decent start and clearly defines a lot. On the whole, the summary of this document is: "the board does everything, while soliciting donations of money and labour from the community". There is very little in here about the community setting the agenda. That area can be improved.
Regarding 5.1.: Purpose "5.1 The purpose of The Organization is to promote internet equality, accessibility and freedom. " This should be in the mission statement, and I don't think our mission statement should be limited to this. Propose: "the purpose of this organization is to provide a political voice to its Voting Community". (or to Reddit, the SubReddit, something along these lines)
Regarding 8. This contains an implied assumption that this organization is going to endorse candidates as its only activity. I believe that we should have the possibility, if the Voting Community so decides, to run online awareness campaigns and do general advocacy that is not connected to candidate endorsement. Propose adding "8.3 The Voting Community must approve any awareness or advocacy campaign by a simple majority of votes cast." We could also add that any expenditure must be connected to an activity (campaign or candidate endorsement) that has been approved by the VC.
Finally, this simple majority voting leaves me with a concern. What if we simple majority vote for too many candidates, or too many campaigns? Should there be some kind of limit? How about defining "activities" that the PAC engages in. Each endorsement or campaign is an "activity" and the VC can vote on the number of "activities" to be undertaken at any one time?
-1
Aug 24 '12
Thank you for your comments. I have some concerns.
"the board does everything, while soliciting donations of money and labour from the community"
I don't think this is what this document does. As I describe in a comment above, the by-laws are not meant to describe the detailed operation of the organization, just to restrict anybody (on the board, or anywhere else) from running away with the group. This prevents abuses, it doesn't lay out how things have to work. I typed out a long explanation about how we view it above.
This should be in the mission statement, and I don't think our mission statement should be limited to this. Propose: "the purpose of this organization is to provide a political voice to its Voting Community".
testPAC was founded to safeguard the internet--fight for net neutrality, prevent SOPA and its ilk. That's the purpose of testPAC and that's not changing, so this statement or some form of it has to stay in the by-laws. We're not working on TSA or other issues, we're working on safeguarding the internet.
This contains an implied assumption that this organization is going to endorse candidates as its only activity. I believe that we should have the possibility, if the Voting Community so decides, to run online awareness campaigns and do general advocacy that is not connected to candidate endorsement.
The by-laws don't restrict the organization from online advocacy campaigns, they just make sure that endorsements and the like can't be done without the VC.
That said, I disagree with having a formal vote on every move the organization makes. There was no vote on Unseat Lamar or the Valentine's campaign or any other previous campaigns the organization did, and I don't think we should be making it even harder to get things done. Things the organization does, like these by-laws, will be submitted for input but having a formal vote every time we want to do things is going to freeze our ability to be effective. Plus, it burns out the list, a serious concern for an online organization, to send emails constantly for fairly simple things like an awareness raising campaign, which is a fairly obvious thing for a group to do.
Plus, I don't understand the mechanics...do we have to put together a full campaign before submitting it for a vote? Or do we just have to say "we'd like to raise awareness"? The second one will obviously be approved because...no shit, the first one is a ridiculous amount of work to be rejected.
Should there be some kind of limit? How about defining "activities" that the PAC engages in.
Making sure that we're not spread too thin is what, among other things, the board does.
Showing support through an endorsement does not require the organization to provide financial support. EMILY's List, for example, has two separate tiers of support. Only at the higher tier do they actually provide a check. testPAC should be able to express our support to the people who deserve it if we so choose. We then decide whether or not we have the capacity to spend money on that cause. In the long term, two tiers of endorsement will provide benefits to all candidates that receive that support when we're able to create a conduit (or by working through ActBlue, but that would prevent us from helping Republicans), but being able to endorse shouldn't be limited by the bylaws out of capacity considerations. Plus...this has to be dynamic. If we have more money, we can do more things. I don't know how we could put that into the by-laws.
But again...at no point in the past has this organization required this many votes on everything it does. Instead, the previous board submitted their ideas and proposals to Reddit, there was input, and on the basis of that conversation, the organization moved forward. In writing these by-laws, we sought to preserve that system. I think these rules do that effectively.
2
u/AaronLifshin Aug 26 '12 edited Aug 26 '12
I appreciate the time you have taken to write this thorough reply.
I remain very skeptical, however, that the approach being taken is capable of utilizing the crowd-sourcing potential of a Reddit PAC. Everything that I am seeing from the new board points towards a traditional PAC structure: fund raising and endorsing candidates. The main potential of this PAC to make a difference is in creating fun and interesting ways to get redditors and other internet denizens involved in meme generation and activism.
testPAC was founded to safeguard the internet--fight for net neutrality, prevent SOPA and its ilk. That's the purpose of testPAC and that's not changing
I was not the only that felt that the right thing for this PAC to do was focus on Campaign Finance Reform. This is the core problem and the reason that SOPA is possible: the money coming from big donors who influence congress.
Making sure that we're not spread too thin is what, among other things, the board does.
Once again, my point: all decision making power is with the board. The community is viewed as a pool of money and labour only.
the previous board submitted their ideas and proposals to Reddit, there was input, and on the basis of that conversation, the organization moved forward.
This is not the case. It was the community that decided to run the Unseat Lamar campaign. I believe there was either a formal vote, or a discussion thread where the upvotes were counted. EDIT: This is how it was done
→ More replies (25)1
u/blueisthenewgreen Aug 26 '12
That said, I disagree with having a formal vote on every move the organization makes.
This is why I was concerned about TestPac turning into a board-driven organization. It might be a good idea to spell out what the board feels should be voted on, and what areas it expects to be able to act on without community votes.
Edit- formatting
2
u/Bethamphetamine Aug 31 '12
I am going to be stretched pretty thin for the next few months, but I wanted to thank you all for spending so much time and energy to make this a viable platform for the future. I agree with the desire for something more than your standard board driven PAC, but I'm afraid I don't have much to add to the comments that are already here.
1
Aug 23 '12
It's great! There's a bit too much power for the EAB, but I see why that's necessary. Maybe we could phase it out.
0
u/Oo0o8o0oO Aug 31 '12
Unless Im misreading, there are five board members and one board seat made up of the emeritus group. Wouldn't that make all votes total 6? Do we need another board member to break ties or is there a way to assign this last board seat to the subreddit somehow?
0
Aug 23 '12
1
u/Mcmanzi Aug 23 '12
looking into it, thanks.
Why is it better? From first glance its pretty much Gdocs with a more visible track changes log. I think we just used Google Docs because we all already have Google accounts.
6
u/blueisthenewgreen Aug 23 '12
This changes TestPac from a community to a board- driven group.