Originally Posted by bover
The whole thing about reps serving on the BoD is something that has always bothered me a bit and I'm glad to see it come up here in conversation. In my opinion, it really is the definition of conflict-of-interest. Folks in this position vote on contests to sanction, then turn around and earn a paycheck working as reps (or in the case of Sam's, as organizers) for those very same contests. I'm not saying that there is any form of collusion happening today, but the undeniable fact is that the potential for it is there.
I have no problem with people certified to be reps serving on the BoD as they generally have their thumbs on the pulse of the competition world, but I do strongly believe that they should abstain from performing any rep duties while they are serving.
I understand that concern as well as your views. Looking at your last paragraph, don't we negate many of the benefits of having Reps on the board if we cut them off from the teams and judges?
I understand that they can benefit, slightly, financially. My greater concern would be the manner in which they get their assignments. That process is now in the office to my understanding, and the goal is to serve the organizers and make everything as fair as possible.
I think it would be fair to take a look at the process and maybe put some safeguards in place, but I'm not willing to commit to banning a Rep from working contests. I think that's a net loss for KCBS.
Cook's have the opportunity to win money, and we aren't talking about banning them from cooking. I think a healthy board would have cooks, judges, reps, and organizers. With the proper safeguards, better communication, and scrutiny from membership, I believe many perceived issues of undue benefit go away.