Charlie Bruce

Question: from GF: How can an RVC, especially one with many years in Mensa prior to becoming RVC, provide guidance and assistance to the local groups in his region while avoiding the dual pitfalls of having such assistance turn into micromanagement and taking it personally when such guidance is rejected by the local group(s)?

Answer:

Although I have 28 continuous years in Mensa, I also have that and longer in supervisory and managerial positions where significant use of tact and diplomacy have been essential. Guidance and assistance do not mean control and issuance of mandated commands. Micromanagement is inappropriate in any AMC position. Mensa is not a political organization; it is a social society and the elimination of micromanagement (and prevention of its recurrence) is one of the main reasons I'm running for RVC.

Our 16 groups in Region 3 each have an ExComm or governing body that is responsible for the control of the group. Situations may arise that require guidance from the RVC. In those instances I will use all resources available to provide appropriate assistance. I would not expect my recommendations to always be acceptable and, were that to occur, it is not something that I would take personally. I would, however, continue attempts to find an amicable solution.

Occasionally a local group may make a decision that is contrary to Mensa policies. If this should occur, I will inform the governing body of the infraction and use tact and diplomacy to suggest alternatives that are acceptable to all parties concerned.

—Charlie Bruce
   Nominated and Petition Candidate for Regional Vice Chairman, Region 3

Rick Magnus

Question from GF: Many times during discussion of complex issues, you have cited bylaws and ASIEs in an attempt to create a basis in "Mensa law" for such discussions. What, in your opinion, should be done in circumstances where the basis in "Mensa law" conflicts with a desired result?

Answer:

First, I don't believe in creating a "Mensa Law"; instead, I do believe that we need to know our starting point and our options (including limitations). We must comply with the laws of the world in which we operate—for organizational purposes, that's the not-for-profit corporation law of the State of New York. We need to heed the Constitution of Mensa and the Bylaws of American Mensa—realizing that they can be amended through proper methods.

ASIEs are very different; they represent the decisions we have made in the past that apply as baselines until such time as we either make an exception or change the baseline. The advantage of an ASIE—a resolution of continuing effect—is that we don't have to start from zero every time, while we maintain flexibility. No one wants to see AMC pass separate resolutions to individually authorize payment of each printing bill for the Bulletin—we authorize the staff to do so by ASIE and by budget approval.

(The questions AMC posed to all the candidates in this election are a good example. The questions are unchanged over the last few elections. Last year, when a motion was proposed to put these questions to candidates "in the 2003 election," as had been done for the 2001 election, I proposed an amendment changing the resolution to say that the questions should be put to candidates "in each election," and it was incorporated into the motion that passed. As AML prepares for the 2005 election, AMC will not need to vote upon this issue again, unless there is a desire to change one or more of the questions. If there is a desire to change those questions, the changes can easily be voted upon and adopted.)

What should we do when the rules and results we desire conflict? The end can never justify the means. Our first obligation as Mensa officers is to the organization, and, like it or not, the organization is a corporation, a legal entity. That means we have to act in compliance with New York not-for-profit law, the Constitution of Mensa, and the Bylaws of American Mensa. Given the choice of doing the right thing, or of doing something "feel-good" or otherwise popular or expedient, I'll always choose to do what's right. My experience is that disregarding rules for momentary accomplishment usually leads to results that we regret, at least in the long run. (Could there come a time when I thought a rule so immoral that it deserved to be flaunted? Absolutely, but I would be shocked if that arose in my role as RVC in the USA today.)

If the obstacle to the desired result is in the Constitution or the Bylaws, we can propose an amendment for the membership to consider, but we have no right to disregard the limits on our authority until and unless the limits are changed. (Of course, reasonable minds can sometimes read those documents differently, and we find ourselves having to ask legal counsel for an opinion as to what the document means. Those who drafted the documents could not fully anticipate changes in society. Ultimately, a court may end up telling us what the document "actually" means, but it's always best to avoid getting to that point if we can do so.)

This doesn't mean that we should let an obstacle in the law or our governing documents be the end of our efforts if we're sure that the result is in fact desirable. In that case, we can and should propose an amendment to the AML Bylaws, and we the members can pass the amendment. We can propose an amendment to the Constitution of Mensa, and an even broader "we" can pass that amendment. If state laws are a problem, we can reincorporate in another state, or we as members (not the society!) can seek to have the law changed. Granted, it's unlikely that we alone can get a state to change its laws, but if we have a good reason for it to do so, most likely there are others who will be pushing for the same change.

And if we can't change the rules—well, Mensa can't be and/or do everything. We're not going to establish world peace, or get everyone to love one another, or even get an appropriate education for every gifted child—each a desirable result, but not one Mensa can accomplish (even internally). As members, we have the ability to join other organizations to try to accomplish desired goals for which Mensa is not the appropriate vehicle. We can use Mensa to find other Mensa members who share our desire, and work with them outside Mensa to accomplish our goals. Mensa is a wonderful part of our lives, but not the only part—and, frankly, that's fine with me!

I want to continue to work to help Mensa accomplish those desirable results that Mensa can appropriately accomplish, and thus I seek re-election. But I recognize that there are limits (not just in law, but that's all I was asked here!), and I am prepared to work within those limits.

—Rick Magnus
   Candidate for Re-election
   Great Lakes & Ohio Valley Regional Vice Chairman
   AML Region 3