Post by MTD on Mar 18, 2004 19:01:08 GMT -6
I threatened (see campechesteel.proboards15.com/index.cgi?board=Division&action=display&thread=1079586617) Bylaw change proposals. Here is the 13th. It resolves the conflict between two articles in the Bylaws (Article IV and Article VI) about appointment of bout committees, so the Chairman no longer has to do the nearly impossible job of satisfying two entirely different sets of instructions about bout committees.
"Proposition 13": Conflict between Article IV and Article VI about Bout Committee Matters
Overview:
The Bylaws are internally in conflict concerning bout committees for tournaments. The simplest explanation is that the Bylaws were originally internally consistent, but at a later time either Article IV (which describes the Chairman) or Article VI (which describes the Division's standing committee named "Bout Committee") was changed without changing the other at the same time. It is clear that Article IV and Article VI now are trying to say different things. Mostly, it is possible to satisfy both simultaneously -- but by acting much more narrowly than either article seems to have been meant -- so as to end up satisfying the other article too.
When reading what I have written, clearly distinguish between what I write as "Bout Committee" (with capital letters), which means the Division standing committee described in Article VI, and what I write as "bout committee" (with lower case letters), which is the specific group of people doing bout committee functions at a specific tournament. The Bylaws themselves contain both meanings. But, in the Bylaws, capitalization cannot even be used to tell the difference -- only context can be used.
Note that these Bylaws can seem a little puzzling to someone with only recent experience with the Division. To make more sense of them, consider the Division as it existed in earlier decades, where all tournaments were centrally organized, as contrasted with the present situation where almost all tournaments are organized in a decentralized fashion.
Further note that language in Article VI seems to prescribe how a bout committee (also called the Directoire Technique in the fencing rules) operates, but realize that the USFA has separately already prescribed this. Indeed, to such extent that the USFA has prescribed differently, the language in Article VI is null and void, and a successful attempt to abide by such conflicting language in Article VI could endanger whether the tournament could be considered sanctioned by the USFA.
And, if things weren't already confused enough, there has been recent discussion in the Division using the term "bout committee" in conjunction with activities preceding the conducting of the tournament which the USFA clearly defines to be the role of the "organizing committee" and outside the control of the "bout committee" (including, for example, arranging for the venue!). (See Operations Manual, Chapter II, Section 5, and Fencing Rules, rules o.3, o.5, t.97, o.58.)
Now, setting aside discussion of text which duplicates or contradicts what the USFA separately prescribes, here is the crux
(Note that nothing stops the Division Chairman from explicitly, or implicitly by declining to object, accepting a recommendation from an organizing committee about who the members of a bout committee should be.)
The proposed change revises both Article IV and Article VI so they coordinate with each other, and removes some restrictions, so the result is sort of a compromise between what Articles IV and VI currently require.
Current text:
Article IV -- Officers, Section 1 (Chairman), Sub-Section A. Duties of the Chairman, 4: "The Chairman shall appoint a bout Committee for each tournament. The Chairman or his appointee shall be the de facto Chairman of the bout committee at every tournament."
Article VI -- Committees, Section 1: "Bout Committee: The Chairman of the Bout Committee shall have charge of and conduct all competitions in THE DIVISION. He shall appoint (2) or more other members of THE DIVISION for each competition who with him shall constitute the Bout Committee for such competition. He shall decide all disputes arising during the course of a competition. An appeal may be taken from any decision of the Chairman to the Bout Committee as a whole, in which event the decision of a majority of the members of the Bout Committee shall control."
Motion:
In the Gulf Coast Division Bylaws, Article IV, Section 1, Sub-Section A. replace part 4 with "If the position of Chairman of the Bout Committee, a standing committee of THE DIVISION, shall be vacant for any reason, then the Chairman shall perform the duties of the Chairman of the Bout Committee.", and, in Article VI, Section 1, cognizant of the possibility that existing wording in the second half of the section may conflict with USFA rules and procedures and be null and void but not wanting at this time to address such issues, replace Section 1 with: "Bout Committee: The Chairman of the Bout Committee or his appointee shall be the de facto Chairman of the bout committee at each tournament in THE DIVISION. The chairman of each individual bout committee shall have charge of and conduct that tournament. The Chairman of the Bout Committee shall also appoint (2) or more other members of THE DIVISION and possibly other members of USFA, INC. for each competition who, with the chairman of the bout committee of the competition, shall constitute the bout committee for such competition. The chairman of an individual bout committee shall decide all disputes arising during the course of that competition. An appeal may be taken from any decision of the chairman to the bout committee as a whole, in which event the decision of a majority of the members of the bout committee shall control."
"Proposition 13": Conflict between Article IV and Article VI about Bout Committee Matters
Overview:
The Bylaws are internally in conflict concerning bout committees for tournaments. The simplest explanation is that the Bylaws were originally internally consistent, but at a later time either Article IV (which describes the Chairman) or Article VI (which describes the Division's standing committee named "Bout Committee") was changed without changing the other at the same time. It is clear that Article IV and Article VI now are trying to say different things. Mostly, it is possible to satisfy both simultaneously -- but by acting much more narrowly than either article seems to have been meant -- so as to end up satisfying the other article too.
When reading what I have written, clearly distinguish between what I write as "Bout Committee" (with capital letters), which means the Division standing committee described in Article VI, and what I write as "bout committee" (with lower case letters), which is the specific group of people doing bout committee functions at a specific tournament. The Bylaws themselves contain both meanings. But, in the Bylaws, capitalization cannot even be used to tell the difference -- only context can be used.
Note that these Bylaws can seem a little puzzling to someone with only recent experience with the Division. To make more sense of them, consider the Division as it existed in earlier decades, where all tournaments were centrally organized, as contrasted with the present situation where almost all tournaments are organized in a decentralized fashion.
Further note that language in Article VI seems to prescribe how a bout committee (also called the Directoire Technique in the fencing rules) operates, but realize that the USFA has separately already prescribed this. Indeed, to such extent that the USFA has prescribed differently, the language in Article VI is null and void, and a successful attempt to abide by such conflicting language in Article VI could endanger whether the tournament could be considered sanctioned by the USFA.
And, if things weren't already confused enough, there has been recent discussion in the Division using the term "bout committee" in conjunction with activities preceding the conducting of the tournament which the USFA clearly defines to be the role of the "organizing committee" and outside the control of the "bout committee" (including, for example, arranging for the venue!). (See Operations Manual, Chapter II, Section 5, and Fencing Rules, rules o.3, o.5, t.97, o.58.)
Now, setting aside discussion of text which duplicates or contradicts what the USFA separately prescribes, here is the crux
- Article IV says:
- the Division Chairman says who is on each bout committee
- there is no required number of people and no criteria for eligibility
- the Division Chairman says who is the de facto (actual, not figurehead) chair of each bout committee
- Article VI says:
- the Chairman of the Bout Committee says who is on each bout committee
- and there must be at least the Chairman of the Bout Committee personally and at least two other members of the Division, but no one from outside the Division
- there is no explicit requirement who must chair each bout committee
- To satisfy both Article IV and Article VI simultaneously requires:
- the Division Chairman has no choice but to appoint himself the Chairman of the Bout Committee, so both articles can be satisfied when he then appoints each individual bout committee
- the Division Chair, who also is the Chairman of the Bout Committee through his appointment of himself to that role, must be on all individual bout committees, and so must at least two other members of the Division, but no one from outside the Division
- the Division Chairman says who is the de facto (actual, not figurehead) chair of each bout committee
(Note that nothing stops the Division Chairman from explicitly, or implicitly by declining to object, accepting a recommendation from an organizing committee about who the members of a bout committee should be.)
The proposed change revises both Article IV and Article VI so they coordinate with each other, and removes some restrictions, so the result is sort of a compromise between what Articles IV and VI currently require.
Current text:
Article IV -- Officers, Section 1 (Chairman), Sub-Section A. Duties of the Chairman, 4: "The Chairman shall appoint a bout Committee for each tournament. The Chairman or his appointee shall be the de facto Chairman of the bout committee at every tournament."
Article VI -- Committees, Section 1: "Bout Committee: The Chairman of the Bout Committee shall have charge of and conduct all competitions in THE DIVISION. He shall appoint (2) or more other members of THE DIVISION for each competition who with him shall constitute the Bout Committee for such competition. He shall decide all disputes arising during the course of a competition. An appeal may be taken from any decision of the Chairman to the Bout Committee as a whole, in which event the decision of a majority of the members of the Bout Committee shall control."
Motion:
In the Gulf Coast Division Bylaws, Article IV, Section 1, Sub-Section A. replace part 4 with "If the position of Chairman of the Bout Committee, a standing committee of THE DIVISION, shall be vacant for any reason, then the Chairman shall perform the duties of the Chairman of the Bout Committee.", and, in Article VI, Section 1, cognizant of the possibility that existing wording in the second half of the section may conflict with USFA rules and procedures and be null and void but not wanting at this time to address such issues, replace Section 1 with: "Bout Committee: The Chairman of the Bout Committee or his appointee shall be the de facto Chairman of the bout committee at each tournament in THE DIVISION. The chairman of each individual bout committee shall have charge of and conduct that tournament. The Chairman of the Bout Committee shall also appoint (2) or more other members of THE DIVISION and possibly other members of USFA, INC. for each competition who, with the chairman of the bout committee of the competition, shall constitute the bout committee for such competition. The chairman of an individual bout committee shall decide all disputes arising during the course of that competition. An appeal may be taken from any decision of the chairman to the bout committee as a whole, in which event the decision of a majority of the members of the bout committee shall control."