posted on September 23, 2001 11:04:44 AM new
AuctionUsers.org, the single advocacy group for online auction buyers and sellers, appears to be imploding. Questions about the validity of the recent Board of Directors election are surfacing, as well as personal issues regarding members of the BOD. Half the BOD has resigned (including newly-elected directors), leaving just three directors out of a possible eight. Members are posting resignations and there is talk of legal action action against the Online Auction Users Association. It appears things will get worse at OAUA before they get better.
Do we need an auction users' advocacy group, and can it be effective? Can the OAUA survive the crisis, and if so, what changes might/should occur?
posted on September 23, 2001 11:14:51 AM new
I have stated this on another Board if the OAUA falls completely It will not make a come back.
as long as people want to hold officers to there every life style choice and what goes on in there personal life no one will be perfect enough to run an organization untill Christ returns ..... http://www.Dman-N-Company.com
Email [email protected]
posted on September 23, 2001 11:27:29 AM newSpaz,I'm not an OAUA member and have no axe to grind. In fact, I've always had a great respect for OAUA. I can't help but notice that with so many recent accusations and revelations, the OAUA is starting to look like a house of cards.
I've always seen AW as a cornerstone of the OAI, followed closely by OAUA. With the changes at AW and the possible fall of OAUA, what's left for auction sellers and buyers?
Dman, there's more to it than the lifestyle of one Director. Clearly there's infighting among the folks running the show, to the point of political ousters, admitted coverups, and valid concerns about the legality of the election and other recent actions.
I'm not asking for judgement of any individual, but I wonder if the OAUA can continue. Should it be rebuilt, or trashed? Can another new advocacy group take the place of OAUA, or is there even a point to it?
posted on September 23, 2001 11:39:45 AM new
Sorry, twinsoft. I momentarily confused you with that guy who was complaining about not being allowed in the BOD election.
eBay seemed to listen to the OAUA when issues like the competitive banner ads and things like that came up. Of course it will hurt if we lose a voice when it comes to sellers' interests.
posted on September 23, 2001 12:02:48 PM new
The OAUA and its election and problems have been all about personal attacks and lifestyle attacking since sinces jamie nomination was denied.
It started with a conspiracy theory, about the election the the infection poison spread rapidly..
Before that moment the OAUA and it process was going on pretty well..
posted on September 23, 2001 12:11:10 PM newThe OAUA and its election and problems have been all about personal attacks and lifestyle attacking since sinces jamie nomination was denied.
As I understand it, that nomination was denied because the party in question had not been a member long enough to run for a BOD position. Didn't he join up and immediately want to be on the BOD?
posted on September 23, 2001 12:33:54 PM new
Actually, he announced his candidacy for the BOD before even applying for membership. There were some questions about the clarity of the rules and the membership process itself. IMO, the first blow was the revelation that the current COO was prosecuted for having an affair with a minor. The next more serious blow (again, IMO) was the admitted coverup of this fact by current BOD members. The next thing that happened was that one of the BODs publicly accused a directorial candidate of using that info for blackmail purposes. The accusation was retracted (called a misunderstanding), but it happened right at the time of the vote.
It's been one thing after another at OAUA, this is just a small sample of what's going on at Online Auction Users Association. Regardless of who did what to whom, member confidence is at zero. There's a public poll posted at this time regarding removal of another of the three remaining directors. It's likely he'll be out, then there will be two directors remaining out of seven (or a possible eight).
[ edited by twinsoft on Sep 23, 2001 12:36 PM ]
posted on September 23, 2001 12:58:06 PM new
Two directors aren't even enough to call for a special election to fill the vacant seats. I don't see how OAUA can survive this.
posted on September 23, 2001 10:05:27 PM new
Do you think it's just too hard to run an organization like this on the web, Maybe not being able to talk and plan face to face is one of the problems.
posted on September 24, 2001 03:28:07 PM new
Or maybe it is a complete and utter failure to communicate.
It is not about a personal lifestyle choice...that is a person's choice as long as it does not interfere with doing what is best for the corporation. That is the law...
Example...a Catholic priest would not be the appropriate head of an abortion clinic...his belief system would not allow him to do what was best for the clinic.
Example...a man that believes he does not have to explain what or why he is doing something, does not believe that any woman or some males are his equal cannot make OAUA's best interest his priority and he is not suitable for that role.
Any organization that is made up of individuals with a similar interest, but in a wide spread geographical area needs communication, good communication. This has been lacking from OAUA, for a number of reasons. There was hope that things would improve after the elections...instead communication was shut down completely. It made things worse. Time will tell about the long term survival...
posted on September 24, 2001 03:31:06 PM new
Maybe if the female members of the OAUA showed alittle subserviance by saying "may we post here, massa?" and bow prettily while clanking around in their chains, the place could be saved after all?
posted on September 25, 2001 08:05:21 AM new
It's not about "lifestyles" it's about the ability to do the job. Period.
IF an OAUA board member's behavior is such that he/she does not communicate openly and/or does not cooperate well with others, it is perfectly reasonable for the membership to openly question that behavior.
It is also reasonable for members to question the effectiveness of any leader whose personal pursuits MAY have a negative impact on the organization.
It is up to the board members to be open and straightforward in answering the members concerns. Strightforward, respectful questions, followed by open, honest answers.
With open communication, 90% of the problems now occurring could have been quickly and effectively dealt with.
posted on September 28, 2001 07:20:43 AM new
I've never joined OAUA and haven't at all followed the politicing there recently. I've seen a bit of the posting and opinions of some of those involved over the past couple of years, though. Looks pretty bad for the organization, though to me now.
After reading through a few of the recently-active threads there here's my spin on what might be an important sub-theme to what's going on: My experience is that in any organization there are some people, generally the initiating officers, who get "down and dirty" dealing with the details of legalities of setting it up then keeping it running. Bylaws and operating agreements have to be written, lawyers consulted, officers elected, meeting minutes kept, inquiries responded to, operating funds collected and accounted for, officers and members communicated with to be sure things are being done correctly, government agencies' requirements met and information updated, etc etc.
It's not uncommon for *other* members to be better at a different style, that of standing aside and from that perspective being able to see greater and lesser problems and failures by the controlling officers. If the "doers" are actually messing up and at serious fault, the "gadflies" can have an important role, witness Ralph Nader in his early days exposing General Motors' deficiencies. However, people who can contribute useful observations in this sort of contrary-sniper role may well be utterly hopeless if thrown into trying to perform the nitty-gritty functions they find so easy to fault from outside.
It looks to me like to some extent this just happened at OAUA, that some individuals who have been oh-so-good at finding faults have just been told, "OK, so you can RUN things. Here's the list of mundane details you're now responsible for. Enjoy." If so, that's like telling wolves they have to learn to eat grass all day long like cattle.
And in the meantime, while these new officers are learning they're out of their element, serious legal issues like required filings and meeting minutes and financial responsibilities will become more muddled (assuming there are some confusions at present, I'm not sure of that, of course).
There may be little choice but to dump that whole structure and start something else up that has a clean legal and administrative slate, or just give up on the idea of even having such an umbrella group, given the disruptive ability the argumentative sorts necessarily have.
posted on September 28, 2001 07:39:41 AM new
pyth00n,
Just one small detail is missing. The recently departed BOD appears to have failed to abide by proper procedure according to the bylaws of the organization as well as State and Federal law.
Fact: An incumbent candidate had access to the balloting process, the scope of which has stil not been determined. The ballot was tampered with, to wit, a candidate who had withdrawn from the race DURING the election, was removed from the ballot by said candidate, without permission.
Fact: An incumbent BOD member made unfounded allegations against a candidate DURING the election. This candidate later withdrew. (See above)
Fact: Legal counsel was consulted by the organization with regard to the inappropriate remarks by the incumbent, BUT, not all of the information was provided to counsel to make an informed opinion.
posted on September 28, 2001 08:31:22 AM new
Twinsoft, Ross has not been appointed president. He, Leon, and I have been appointed to the board of directors. It is not a subtle distinction.
It's unlikely I'll kick in many comments on this, here. But there were legitimate questions about the election process, which the previous board steadfastly refused to address. Frankly I think they're gettig out of Dodge one step ahead of a legal finding of incompetence at the very least with respect to the election. My personal opinion, based on the available facts.
Many other questions were brought up by various persons about other aspects of the way the organization was run. If you look at the record, you'll see that my questions were all related to the election irregularities and non-resposiveness about this. The fact that other people simultaneously brought up other questions (some of which I believe to be utterly unfounded) at the same time does not make us, collectively, a wolfpack.
Someone up there said The OAUA and its election and problems have been all about personal attacks and lifestyle attacking since sinces jamie nomination was denied.
Nope. It was about process, at least for me. (The process whereby a non-member was not allowed to run for office was one I frankly didn't have a problem with.)
It's my belief that the interim board should ensure continuity in essential functions, revise the bylaws to allow a special election for all board seats, and get the hell out of the way so that a legitimately elected board can go forward with the work of the OAUA. Nothing more, nothing less.
