Comments on: The NAFA Verdict Is In

By: BC-Rescue-Mom

BC-Rescue-Mom — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:36:57 +0000

Very true Jackie! Unfortunately, because of the way the system currently works (ie: votes based upon how many tournies teams play in, host, etc.) I don’t see a feasible way for individuals to get votes vs. teams (trust me… I wish I did!). If a team gets 8 votes but has 12 members there is not way to split them up evenly – which could be why they do it the way they do.

In a perfect world… every individual that had dogs registered and active would get a vote and every vote would count. But NAFA seems as though they want to ‘reward’ the clubs that host the most and play the most. I guess the argument might be that the teams that host and play the most are essentially ‘making’ the most money for the organization. But what about the new clubs out there and the smaller clubs in the middle of nowhere that have to travel out of region just to play and for who hosting a tournament just isn’t feasible? I just don’t think the system is necessarily fair to them.

It’s definitely a flawed system… but having dealt with some of the members on the BOD directly, I just don’t see things changing anytime soon. They seem to be content with leaving things as they are and breaking into the ‘inner sanctum’ of the NAFA BOD isn’t that easy to do. It’s a popularity contest like every other form of election out there and some no-name, even with great ideas and the best of intentions, would be hard pressed to pull off that kind of an upset.

By: Jackie Gillies

Jackie Gillies — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:34:13 +0000

I agree with you BC Rescue mom, which is why it would be easier to give delegate votes to persons rather than teams. You can say you have to consult with your team, but, ultimately, in the eyes of NAFA the team Captain has the ultimate say, so it would be REALLY hard to enforce.

By: BC-Rescue-Mom

BC-Rescue-Mom — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:58:04 +0000

I’m probably beating a dead horse here… but a GOOD Captain includes all of his/her team members in ALL voting decisions. Maybe there should be a discussion about poorly Captained teams!! I could write a book about my previous Captain… and it would probably make you all blush! Hence why I am a fair and democratic Captain of my own team now.

By: Larry

Larry — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:25 +0000

That’s another reason why the votes need to go to the people playing and spending there money and not the club.

By: speedy

speedy — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 04:51:20 +0000

I would have loved the opportunity to vote. Unfortunately my club is new so we are not considered part of the voting community. the funny thing is that with my previous club I didn’t get a chance to vote either, because the person in charge made all decisions without consulting the rest of the club… but that’s a whole other story. funny thing is that on a larger scale, that’s exactly what happened with these NAFA elections — we were once again excluded. pity.

By: Jayne

Jayne — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:36:43 +0000

HELLO no one noticed how few people vote for the PRESIDENT of the USA (sorry Canadian friends I don’t know what your polls are like)??? People seriously expect a high turnout for a dog sport organization? Maybe, much like with the US Politicos you hear so many empty promises with any election you loose interest. (Hey I’m in IOWA, political hell right now!). I can only say that we’ve had very few useful interactions with NAFA board members. Those who have helped us or seem to actual get stuff done in office get our votes, those who dismiss us do not. When it comes to electing new BOD members we take into account the whole experience we’ve had with that person on lists, in person, whatever our basis is. If they were nasty, engaging in verbal smackdowns they are not going to get our votes.
Mostly I figure that the BOD has to figure out that it needs to be more responsive to it’s members. We have choices now & that means they have to be competitive. People can vote with their ballots (or lack there of) or they can vote with their $$’s either way is effective.

By: Sonya

Sonya — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:14:04 +0000

NAFA has some issues. In order to improve, we need to have a TRUE representation of the flyball community. The way NAFA stands today, it represents the established firm. That does not, necessarily, represent the current flyball community.

By: Jackie Gillies

Jackie Gillies — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:49:47 +0000

I am confused how one can be “embarrassed” by someone else’s opinion? It is quite obvious from reading anything from Larry, he is frustrated by the direction (or lack of) by the NAFA board. But, clearly he loves flyball, and, is not afraid to put his opinion out there – popular or not. He is clearly thinking what alot of others are thinking as well – those not so inclined to put their heads on the proverbial chopping block.

By: Val

Val — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:21:46 +0000

Judy, I noticed the same thing when I placed our blank votes for ED.

In regards to “no votes” – they can be determined by looking at the number of ballots received and the totals for each “level”. 918 ballots were submitted.
1 2 3
ZC 118 78 124
AR 124 121 172
DS 397 264 107
SS 189 287 115
CV 71 88 155
Total 899 838 673

No Vote 19 80 245 for a total of 344
No votes came in FOURTH place!

By: Judy

Judy — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 13:29:34 +0000

In talking about the election I wonder if there were any votes returned with no votes on them? If so how were they counted? I know that we placed our votes. Also did anybody notice something strange happened when you voted on line? I know that we did not place a vote for the ED position (why bother since it was only one person). But when I went to submit it placed a vote there. Hum glick in the system it would seem. I know it doesn’t make a difference on the ED position (that is probably why we haven’t seen any vote numbers listed in the results for the ED) but it would make one wonder if there were any other glicks (just a thought). Funny that nothing has been mentioned regarding this voting issue either.