Meeting of minds

It was the monthly Chawton Library book group day as well as a committee meeting at the U3A so Mirinda and I didn’t get much time to spend together. To top it off, she had to travel to London tonight (rather than tomorrow morning) for a conference on mountains (don’t ask).

The meeting was as entertaining as the previous one I attended. It’s great being, more or less, an outsider at these things. I have no input into anything (though I’m sure they would listen to any opinion I had), not being a member or really on the committee, so I just get to watch, listen and be entertained.

This meeting was concerned with finishing an argument that has been going on for quite sometime. For so long, in fact, that the chairman issued a decree that they would vote on it, once and for all and then say no more about it. While everyone sort of agreed to this, one person still bought it up later in the meeting.

So they first sorted a proposer and a seconder for both motions (one for, one against). This was not easy but eventually accomplished. It was then time to vote. The chairman called for votes for the first proposal and the two people who proposed and seconded it, alone voted for it. The second proposal easily won given there was at least five people in favour.

The chairman announced the matter closed and tried to move on but was interrupted by a lady next to me who said she’d abstained from either vote and wanted it duly noted in the minutes. This prompted another person to say they also abstained.

Apart from the fact that they only needed one proposition to start with and then vote for, against or abstention, a lot of time was spent dispensing with a subject they wanted to stop wasting time on.

The curious vote counting occurred once more. The Treasurer had asked me to put the committee minutes on the website in a special section. This, of course, was no problem but I needed some clarification on whether they wanted all of the minutes or just the current set. I naturally assumed everyone was happy with it in the first place. I was very wrong.

There then ensued a vigorous debate about whether the minutes should be accessible to all. Of course, according to the constitution, any member can ask to see the minutes at any time and the Secretary pointed this out.

Someone else said that sometimes the content could be quite vigorous and perhaps certain members wouldn’t want to see what was discussed. The Secretary stated she never included these bits anyway, which prompted someone else to suggest we have two sets of minutes – the soft and the salacious. Which is just silly.

Then, the argument became whether the committee actually wanted them on the website at all. The chairman, realising the meeting was running badly over time, suggested a vote. Two against, six for. He said it was passed.

Once more the little voice beside me piped up, saying she had abstained because she needed time to think about the implications. This prompted others to say they had abstained for the same reason. Then someone said they’d like to change their ‘yes’ vote to an abstention.

All manner of craziness was about to ensue when the chairman, wisely, said the committee would consider it and vote at the next meeting.

The other insanity was the matter of the newsletter. It is printed and was, until this edition, posted to every member. With the increase in postage, this was changed to having the members come in and pick them up if they wanted a physical copy. (I won’t go into the insanely convoluted system they decided to use as it’s not pleasant.)

It was then asked of the committee when the digital copy would be available for distribution as there had already been requests for it via email. I’d already been told that I wouldn’t receive it until after the physical copies had been distributed. This was stated at the meeting, with the assertion that the editor wanted the physical ones distributed before the digital version was available.

In my head I was staring in disbelief. On the one hand they want to encourage people to use the website and would rather spend the money for the extra postage on the members rather than actual postage, while on the other they wanted to penalise the people who would be willing to do this. This was crazy talk which I could not suggest needed rearranging by about 180°.

Fortunately the voice of reason was sat beside me. He said it should be the other way around. Inside my head was the sound of a sigh of relief. Given that the editor was downstairs handing out physical copies to the members, the chairman decided this was something that should be discussed at a later meeting.

So, all in all, thoroughly entertaining.
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬

Just a short postscript to say that Mirinda and I ate at a new restaurant chain called Canteen tonight. It was the branch at the Royal Festival Hall. It was fabulous. We will definitely go again. They served the best Bakewell tart and custard I’ve ever tasted…and I’ve tasted a few.