Votes for KCBS BOD

Interesting thoughts
The CBJ vote as I said in another thread is the deal
CBJs know Reps and a few teams so they vote who they know
and great candidates like Phil does not get elected
Look how many Reps are on there now

Our plan, as unofficial as it has been until a more formal announcement (in about 9 days...) has been for the four of us (Dave, Steve, George and myself) to run as sort of a "ticket". Our Web site will be a single Web site with all four of us on that site.

Four open seats No incumbents running for reelection Great time to try it
Got to reach the CBJs Not enough of them read forums The KCBS Bullsheet would be key there
I did not work that and I should have


A proposal I had you may consider that CBJs like
Advanced training for CBJs
The serious CBJ is will to pay for advanced training
a series or online courses which make a modest profit
and distinguish CBJs as one two three etc. star CBJs
would work for all
Better judges better contests happy teams
A organizer would look for 3 star CBJs to fill his judges tent

What is the total number of candidates running? keith

ModelMaker said:

Congratulations to the Brethren offering their time and expertise to run for KCBS BOD .
I remember in previous years also having good people with the right idea wanting in and have seen them fall to the wayside at election time partly because of watering down of the vote by voting for 4 candidates (all worthy) and thus nobody really getting a strong enough majority for all 4 to win.
I would like to start a discussion of a way to garner enough votes for a Brethren candidate or two to succeed and join the board as our representatives.
What can we do to move one of our own onto the board?
Perhaps if we just voted for one or two it would strengthen our chances???
Anybody have any thoughts?
Should the Brethren sign off on a thread to guaranty participation by voting and then contact those not pledging and encourage them to vote?
We have some great people running to help solve some self inflicted wounds and we all need to help put them in position to do so.
Ed

Click to expand...

I would think if the Brethren cast all 4 of their votes for these 4 candidates would be better than (if I understand your idea) only voting for 2 of the candidates. If you only vote for 1 or 2, those 2 are still getting the same number of votes regardless. The only way this would help these Brethren candidates is if you only wanted to vote for 1 or 2 of them and cast your other votes for someone else. I hope a greater percentage of the KCBS members cast votes this year.

Consider this
A higher percentage turn out would not work to these candidates advantage
Most KCBS members are CBJs who only know a few names of Reps and top cooks

ModelMaker said:

Congratulations to the Brethren offering their time and expertise to run for KCBS BOD .
I remember in previous years also having good people with the right idea wanting in and have seen them fall to the wayside at election time partly because of watering down of the vote by voting for 4 candidates (all worthy) and thus nobody really getting a strong enough majority for all 4 to win.
I would like to start a discussion of a way to garner enough votes for a Brethren candidate or two to succeed and join the board as our representatives.
What can we do to move one of our own onto the board?
Perhaps if we just voted for one or two it would strengthen our chances???
Anybody have any thoughts?
Should the Brethren sign off on a thread to guaranty participation by voting and then contact those not pledging and encourage them to vote?
We have some great people running to help solve some self inflicted wounds and we all need to help put them in position to do so.
Ed

Click to expand...

Ed, speaking for myself I'd ask that this not go forward. I understand the reasoning and in the past could see the benefit. In this case, as Jeff has pointed out, the four of us have an understanding of the core issues on which we agree. Even if all four of us are elected we do not have the votes to make any changes without support for existing members of the board. If those numbers are reduced to 3 or fewer the task becomes that much more difficult. It is my hope that we will make some positive progress in the first year, if elected, and that the following year more people may decide that positive change is possible and be willing to run and join us.

I feel I should be clear about something else, so that nobody gets the wrong idea. Before we chose to run none of us, as far as I know, knew who may or may not have been running for reelection. None of this is about personal agendas. It's purely about the issues and the desire to help make positive changes to the board for the benefit of ALL members.

For those that may agree with our positions on the issues, which we will expand and clarify over time, I'd ask that you campaign for US. Let your friends know what we believe in, ask them to take a look for themselves and give us the opportunity to earn their vote and support. To answer Thom's question or point, that's how I hope to reach the judges.

ThomEmery said:

Consider this
A higher percentage turn out would not work to these candidates advantage
Most KCBS members are CBJs who only know a few names of Reps and top cooks

Click to expand...

Yes, that is a valid point.

My thoughts may be way off, and I'm not sure my search of the registered members of the BBQ Brethren is correct, but consider this from KCBS for the last election:

Election Statistics:
Total ballots returned = 2591
Total number of eligible voters = 14060
Percent of ballot return = 18.43%

Based on looking at the Brethren membership list there are 8386 registered members. I know many of those may not be active but even 50% is 4193 potential voters, 25% is 2096 potential voters. If just 25% of the Brethren members voted that would have carried the last election. The top vote getter received 1007 votes. I know this is unscientific, and that just being a Brethren doesn't mean they are also KCBS members but if we could motivate just the Brethren to vote look at the potential.

Phil would be just about done with his second term if.......
We don't have enough KCBS Members here to carry

ThomEmery said:

Phil would be just about done with his second term if.......
We don't have enough KCBS Members here to carry

Click to expand...

Well, I had high hopes anyway.

Regardless, good luck and thank you to ALL the candidates who choose to run.

ModelMaker said:

Perhaps your right it might be a bit early to talk election stratagy. My goal was to increase voter participation and get 4 like minded individuals elected to the board.
It would be good not to have any sides drawn between cook teams, judges, current BOD, etc. The organization needs to move towards beterment as a group not certain factions of that group.
I know last year those who thought change should be made by straitening out the judges got checked off my list immediatly! I'm certainly not against making and keeping the best judging pool possible. But pointing fingers is not going to work for me.
To many, your only contact with voters is the Bull sheet please present yourselves as interested in the organization as a whole not wanting to fix only a part thereof.
I think the four of you running as a "ticket" is a good idea. Do you think the general KCBS member would see it as a benefit?
Speaking of "general members" I see the thought is a good portion of KCBS members are CBJ's mainly because if you want to judge you have to be a member. Is there a feeling that all head cooks should have mandatory membership also? I'm sure many are but personally I think if your enjoying the benefits of KCBS sanctioning you should also be a member. Period.
Ed

Click to expand...

The issues I have with judges, are restricted to a minority. I take issue with a judge that registers for an event and doesn't show up, or provide notice. I have issues with judges that make it their mission in life to teach a cook or cooks a lesson. I have issues with judges that don't, can't, or won't follow the rules as they exist. They are in the minority. The overwhelming majority of judges come out, take the task seriously, and do a lot to make KCBS contests superior in many ways.

We specifically wanted Dave Compton to run because he's a judge and is respected and appreciated by cooks, judges, reps, etc... Beyond that there has been no voice on the board for judges since Ed Roith. I think Dave is perfect for that role, as well as having the best interest of KCBS and the membership at heart.

As for requiring cooks to be members...I'm inclined to say 'no' unless someone can offer a reason I haven't heard or thought of, and I'll explain why. It's ultimately a decision made by organizers. They are not required to use CBJs for judging but many do, in order to attract teams. If a contest doesn't require CBJ status anyone can judge and with few exceptions for free. Cooks are required to pay an entry fee, and a portion of that will go to pay KCBS fees. Whether they have a membership or not, they are buying into the system for a weekend. I don't think it's the place of KCBS to tell organizers who can judge, or who they can allow to cook unless a judge or team has been banned for cause. With costs rising, I don't think placing a barrier to participation helps anyone. I would hope that a cook would see some benefit to joining and supporting an organization that supports something that they enjoy, but I don't believe that it's right mandate membership as a requirement for participation. I think the responsibility is with KCBS to create a desire for cooks to want to join.

ModelMaker said:

Is there a feeling that all head cooks should have mandatory membership also? I'm sure many are but personally I think if your enjoying the benefits of KCBS sanctioning you should also be a member. Period.
Ed

Click to expand...

Every cook team pays for KCBS sanctioning through their entry fee. The only extra benefit to a cook team to be a member is the Team of the Year race. As it stands now only a small percentage of teams cook enough contests to qualify for Team of the year.

ModelMaker said:

Is there a feeling that all head cooks should have mandatory membership also? I'm sure many are but personally I think if your enjoying the benefits of KCBS sanctioning you should also be a member. Period.
Ed

Click to expand...

Requiring membership would force KCBS to change it's IRS status and would eliminate all KCBS events from being qualifiers for the Jack (unless the Jack changed their policy).

I've recently come into possession of sex tapes of certain BOD candidates. On the phone with TMZ making a deal now.

Slamdunkpro said:

Requiring membership would force KCBS to change it's IRS status and would eliminate all KCBS events from being qualifiers for the Jack (unless the Jack changed their policy).

Click to expand...

American Bass Anglers events required membership and were Jack qualifiers.

no please no sex tapes
I hear there are 10 plus candidates expected

ThomEmery said:

no please no
I hear there are 10 plus candidates expected

Click to expand...

That's a lot of people losing their minds at one time. :crazy: