NAF World Headquarters
General - Re: My post on the Prez Election Q&A thread (and thought
Deathwing - Jul 21, 2009 - 04:16 PM
Post subject: Re: My post on the Prez Election Q&A thread (and thought
Just some clarification.
First of all, it was out of place to post personal opinions on the Q&A thread. It should have been posted on a separate thread elsewhere, perhaps similar to the 'Presidential election sledging' thread I remember back when I was involved in an election. There should indeed be a public place where members can discuss and post opinions on the candidates and their respective manifestos.
Discussions in person and in public obviously happen, PMs, emails and SMS fly around, phone calls are made. There should indeed be a thread for that here (of all places!).
Secondly the following was simply inaccurate:
Deathwing wrote:
I too (obviously) spoke to "many members during and after the election" and quite frankly most were simply appalled at the prospect of Geoff Porritt as NAF President.
I should have posted that a few were "simply appalled" and most viewed the prospect with some trepidation.
My unreserved apologies for what was, in retrospect, misrepresentation of the true picture.
Some more quotes I'd like to address:
Deathwing wrote:
There would certainly be (I believe) a damaging split amongst active members of the NAF community should you become our next President. (I've spoken to enough members to justify that belief.)
and..
Deathwing wrote:
..reassure those doubters amongst us that you do, in fact, have the diplomatic skills that are such an important and necessary part of being NAF President?
The first quote I'd like to stress the "I believe". I'm still not entirely convinced otherwise.. whilst away last week on a canal holiday I received more than a few texts and phone calls to the effect of "you posted what a lot of us are thinking and saying". There is certainly a body of "doubters" out there. Whether warranted or not, Geoff does have a certain reputation amongst some members of the community. Should he win the election I do indeed "..wish (him) all the very best and hope that my take on the situation was misjudged and you prove me (and all the other doubters) wrong.. My fear is a "damaging split", my hope is that such fear is ungrounded.
As to the second quote.. having spoken to Geoff tonight, he did indeed go some way to reassuring me personally (without totally convincing me) with regard to his diplomatic skills and his ability as to what the role requires.
Some more personal opinion and thoughts (as I believe there is absolutely a place on these forums for such things)..
I still believe that Dave Downes is the right man to take this organisation forward and bring to fruition lot of the good work already underway. I do (as stated in my original post) have a lot of respect for Geoff, but I don't think this is the right role at the right time. I'd love to see Geoff officially involved in the NAF in some capacity (for example; he'd be a very strong candidate for my vote the next time the Tournament Director election rolls around.) Should Geoff win however, my trepidation has lessened somewhat after our conversation tonight...
We'll see what transpires.... all the best to both candidates.
But vote Dave! 
(Vote Geoff next time! ) 
P.S. Sort the dice pics out.
P.P.S. (For Galak) I was pissed in the US sense of the phrase, certainly not the UK one. I'm glad Geoff's response made you laugh, that and your reply amused me too. 
Hudson - Jul 22, 2009 - 02:08 AM
Post subject:
My faith in human kind is restored now. I never had you down as a vindictive guy and you've proved me right.
Your response to the comments made in the other thread are well put.
On a down side i'm still split on the question of who to vote for still.
dwarfcoach - Jul 22, 2009 - 03:31 AM
Post subject:
Hudson wrote:
...
On a down side i'm still split on the question of who to vote for still.
Vote for Dave.
DukeJan - Jul 23, 2009 - 01:19 AM
Post subject:
Hudson wrote:
...
On a down side i'm still split on the question of who to vote for still.
I know who I will vote for and why. I think a thread to discuss this is a good idea, so I will motivate my choice.
Vote for Lycos and you will see a continuation of a successful presidency where volunteers run a rapidly growing organisation. A lot has changed (for the better) in the way volunteers are organised under his presidency.
Vote for Lucifer and (how I read the Q&A) you will see someone trying to run NAF like a professional organisation. To me the question is to what extend this is needed.
Two different candidates, neither of them can run the NAF on his own. But who will be best at getting people to run it with them?
The best candidate is probably a mix of Lycos and Lucifer. Neither of them is unsuitable, but I think Lycos is closer to the ideal president than Lucifer.
Lycos his approach and personality appears more suitable for an organisation relying on volunteers. Although I think a more professional approach may be welcome some times to implement new things or solve critical problems.
Lucifer's suggested approach requires more commitment from volunteers than he will get. This carries a high risk of mutual frustration. In my opinion this is more dangerous than where I see Lycos his weak point of risking insufficient commitment by a too voluntary approach.