I feel a structure manual needs to be written . Committees need to be established. A vote is on the floor for a Spokesperson, What is the spokespersons duties? what is our voting procedure? 2/3 vote or 51%. These are all things that need to be Iron out. If it is truly an International Association why would you need two spokes persons? I think a board can better delegate the responsibility of the ISTA. Then to have a single dictator to represent the interest of the ISTA . There should be the head chairman, and a alternate head chairman, if the chairman steps down or physically can’t preform .And the other board members, we will need a treasurer if money is to be involved. Secretary, Archivist. And an officer at large to step in any empty seat. Committees Like pubic information and other committees can be establish for a newsletter if on the agenda. ALSO all ISTA members should take a roll in some committee. So this comes down to are you in ISTA or just around the ISTA. I feel for this concept to become reality the first committee to be formed would be a structure committee. Who is interested in creating history?
The only duty of the spokesperson so far are to give us a public face on Snuffhouse. We’ve ruffled a few feathers, I think, for being perceived as elitist or exclusive. Yes, we do have criteria to join, but we’re not exclusive, and certainly not a secret society. So the spokesman should be a new ISTA member, but not a moderator or vendor I think, someone that might be perceived as an “insider”. I think this needs to be rather urgent to calm the general forum. we need to make public our mission statement and our entrance criteria ASAP. The only reason I can think of to have more than one spokesperson is to have someone that speaks a different language. Filek, for example, would make a great spokesman on the Polish snuff forums. The spokesman is not the boss, just someone that can make statements and answer questions from non members, a boss- that would be a chairman, yes. There would only be one chairman, if we think we need one. So yeah a structure committee should be set up to draft a constitution or by-laws. I’ve started a membership committee, and bigmick has joined. We’d like some more input there.
So @Xander rule 3 .[If an ISTA member disseminates any ISTA information to non-members, that member will lose their membership.] would not apply to the liaison to regular snuffhouse members Rule #3 sounds secretive but I guess if there is a sensitive subject matter best not cause panic.
Feel free to scrap the entire rule structure I created. It would be best if it were scrapped and you all were to create your own set.
I think vendors/manufacturers should be out of the running for any official role - as Xander says it would just look to be elitist. There is nothing wrong, in my view, with elitism based on skills and knowledge but not the sort that smacks of the nomenklatura. We need to be wary about creating the impression of an inner sanctum on the wider site whilst protecting the idea of, and right to have an association that requires some kind of qualification to join. It will be tricky but it’s not impossible.
I think vendors/manufacturers should be out of the running for any official role -
We also need to be aware that manufacturers having official, public involvement would limit what we can say. I’m not sure about other countries, but in the US a manufacturer can’t say that a tobacco product is safer than cigs. A private group not directly connected with a tobacco company can. STE, for example, can tell the truth about the dangers or benefits of snuff and snus, Toque or Swedish Match can’t.
Very valid point - I think the whole area is a minefield and those of us in the business are wise to remain as private members only.
In regards to Rule 3, I assumed it was set because it was implied that some manufacturers may possibly use ISTA members as a form of test panel for new snuff ideas or marketing and such. In which case R3 would serve as a tool for not leaking information and making sure misinformation was not spread.
I feel a need for us to loosen the grip of bureaucracy. It is already evident that this beast (ISTA) has the makings of a head and a tail. It will be obvious who plays what part when the beast leaves this lair. So let us set it out on a walkabout! Not going to far, deep, or high at first. Something very simple so that we may feel alive. Things we can do to stretch our muscles: ISTA Snuff of the month ISTA Snuffhouse poster of the month ISTA Informational posts such as Snuff Myths or Snuff Facts Along the line of using the forum publicly will be a good way to self organize and evolve our functions without any funding. Holding contests could be interesting as well and I’m sure the Ideas will come flooding once we start performing more efficiently. The key is to start small with little stress on “getting it right” and more concentration on “cracking our shell”.
Good thinking. ISTA Snuff of the Month and Informational Posts are excellent ideas. However, I would be a bit concerned about ISTA Snuffhouse poster of the month, if this is going to be a feature on the main forum. There is a danger that it would be taken as patronising - along the line of a pat on the head for the ordinary people, if you see what I mean.
Nothing wrong with patronizing or patting the backs of not just ordinary but prospective members. I also had in mind teasing and hazing of posters, including ourselves. To further the idea, what I would like to see develop is a publicly viewable ISTA category that we are in control of where we can post membership instructions among these other things. A moderator would likely be needed to post for us in this section. I would suggest the approval of at least five voting members for posting. Any nay sayers will need their appeals satisfied or perhaps overrun with a larger voting block or the posts repealed. Initially what we want is to be prolific and to push through as much unimportant (posting) decisions as we can so that we can perfect our decision making process.
sounds like you are on to something