| Subject: Re: 1.1.1 |
Author:
Tim
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 11:48:04 06/02/03 Mon
In reply to:
Vesna
's message, "Re: 1.1.1" on 00:21:32 06/02/03 Mon
OK, well that said I think I'd like to propose to the current IVDA executive that a vote is taken at the next GCM to ratify the current constitution. The constitution to be ratified should be published on this site in advance.
I raised this because 1.1.1 has been cited as a premise of the constitution saying we promote dance in the past, and I'm not aware that it has been changed in between. But perhaps this is not true... It's difficult to tell.
We should, therefore:
(a) ratify the constitution at every meeting. That wouldn't be unreasonable, should be fairly trivial, but would make sure that the constitution didn't change without people noticing and without a constitutional amendment (as seems to have been the case).
(b) have this debate anyway. Understanding what the fundamental aims of the association are is significant irrespective of whether it requires a constitutional amendment.
My argument is that, by virtue of our commitment to ballroom dancing, our priorities need to change. As I said, there is nothing wrong with offbeat and Rock 'n Roll, but only in so much as they support ballroom dancing at universities. That is a small amount, therefore their place at IVDC is small, and not as large as it was this year. Hence the need to reduce the time spent on non-ballroom dancing events.
Furthermore, non-core events should never take precedence over core events, or exist in a format that is to the detriment of the core events. The offbeat in its old (probably present - Dave can we have the minutes please!) format did exactly that: by making unreasonable demands on the timetable, forcing the other events to be squeezed into small, and very large, rounds, to the detriment of those competitors entering the core ballroom dancing events.
>>>Perhaps someone could first clarify who holds the
>>>official copy of the constitution, and whether it
>says
>>>what you wrote above, or what is contained in the
>>>version available elsewhere on this web site:
>>
>>There is no "official" copy, but it is expected of the
>>exec to provide an up-to-date version on their
>website.
>
>Maybe this should be stated explicitly somewhere, but
>most people consider the copy on the current IVDA
>website to be the official one. It is passed from one
>exec to the next, and recently it has been passed in
>an electronic form, so that there's not even the
>danger of things being mistyped (and I see that all
>the typos carry over as well :-)
>
>I just discovered something interesting, looking
>through some old copies of the constitution
>(unfortunately, I never did photocopy the entire IVDA
>minutes book, so my collection is fairly limited...)
>
> In 1996 the constitution read:
>1.1.1 The aim of the Inter-Varsity Dance Association
>(IVDA) is to promote an annual ball incorporating an
>Inter-Varsity Dancing COmpetition.
>1.1.2 All British University and College Ballroom
>Dancing Scoieties and Clibs are eligible [...]
>
> The current constitution says
>1.1.1 Thye aim of [...] is to promote ballroom dancing
>within universities and organise an annual ball [...]
>1.1.2 All Societies and Clubs promoting dancing for
>University students in Britain [...]
>
> The change happened around 1998, someone with old
>minutes can check, it would be interesting to see what
>discussion went on then.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 