# Vote:  By-Law Ammendment



## Scott (Dec 19, 2004)

At the last meeting of the IAP Board of Directors, we voted to accept the "Skill Recognition Program" as it was written in the original By-Laws.  This measure now needs to be brought to a vote of the general membership, hence this vote.  View the language of this proposed educational program under Article 3 at this link:

http://www.penturners.org/content/iap_bylaws_revised_9-5-04.pdf

Please take the time to read, understand, and vote on this major ammendment to the IAP By-Laws.  This vote will run from Sunday 12/19/04 through Saturday 12/25/04, constituting the seven day period required in the By-Laws.  Thank you!


----------



## wayneis (Dec 19, 2004)

Even though I voted to accept this ammendment, I think that it will be close to impossable for most individuals to ever achieve the last class, "Grand Master Penturner".  Attaining five is just way too much.  There is only so many board positions available, there are only so many boards to sit on available and one would need to have more extra time available than most even dream of having.  

Other than that I think that all of the recommendations are fair, reasonable and attainable to anyone who is interested in having the designation.  Unless it was created in such a way that only an exceptional and very fortunate person would ever be able to gain this level, then I would like to see the board look at this last designation at some future date.

Wayne


----------



## dougle40 (Dec 19, 2004)

I think that Wayne said it all with regards to "Grand Master" . 
We have members from all over the world and some of us  don't have access to the AAW or don't belong to any clubs that are affiliated with them and being a Board member of the IAP would , for some , be out of the question for whatever reason , which would only leave 5 choises left . Pretty hard to fill in some of those especially those requiring having their work published , which would knock another one or two,leaving only 3 or 4 out of the 5 to qualify for .


----------



## YoYoSpin (Dec 19, 2004)

We've heard these concerns before, but no recommendations for additional or different objective criteria have ever been proposed. If you have some ideas, please post them here.


----------



## Vern (Dec 19, 2004)

I have a concern about this vote being Anonymous. Wouldn't it make more sense and be more relevant if this was a memberâ€™s only vote? Also, wouldn't this prevent multiple votes? We wouldn't want another Florida 2000 on our hands[]


I would secondly like to voice my support of Wayne and Doug's opinions regarding the requirements of the "Grand Master" certification being attached to any political affiliation

Happy Holidays!!

Vern


----------



## Fred in NC (Dec 19, 2004)

Vern, when I voted, my option to vote disappeared from the screen. So I think we can only cast one vote each.  

As for the awards or classes, I understand and even agree with what has been said.  Also agree that these can be revised later if needed.  As the rules stand right now, Grand Master is reserved for a select few who work beyond the call of duty to further the craft.  Nothing wrong with that in my opinion.  As for AAW membership and service, it is just one of the options.


----------



## Vern (Dec 19, 2004)

> Fred in NC wrote:  Vern, when I voted, my option to vote disappeared from the screen. So I think we can only cast one vote each.



I thought so as well Fred,  until I closed my browser and reopened to this topic and was presented with the opportunity to vote again.... I'm not suggesting that anyone should or would keep track of who voted how but that limiting it to members would be more logical rather than allowing any visitor that might happen onto the site to vote (potentially as many times as they felt like). 

Happy Holidays!!

Vern


----------



## wayneis (Dec 19, 2004)

Ed then why even have a level that can not be obtained by anyone that wants to.  I'm a member of both the AAW and IAP but there are only so many slots, as far as a local group goes there is not one close enough for me to attend.  I don't think that I'm alone or I would not have voiced my concern.  The way it is set up now, the best pen crafter in the World may not have a chance to ever attain the highest level just because he/she isn't fortunate enough to live in the right place, have an extra amount of time or whatever.  

Personally I was nominated for a board seat but because of time constraints and uncertain health concerns I regretfully had to turn it down.  I decided that because I only had so much time to offer, I needed to make a choise.  It was either continue trying to help answering questions on the two penturning forums I belong to or except a board seat if I was I voted voted in.  I would guess that I spend as much time answerng individuals questions on the forums as most board members do with board work.  I don't believe that either work is more important than the other but the board member is rewarded but someone like me is not.  Please don't anyone get me wrong, I know that I am not only the only person that answers questions, I'm just trying to make a point that many could make and using myself as an example.     

As for ideas, if something higher is needed or wanted then how about we re-name it something like a Certificate of Instruction an Award of Excellence and lower the number of items needed to qualify because I also believe that needing five is overboard.

Wayne


----------



## Fred in NC (Dec 19, 2004)

Wayne, frankly titles don't mean that much to me.  The best award is when a customer pulls money out of pocket and gives it to me.  To me they are the best judges of my work and skills.  I will go along with the group's decision, but more important to me is to be here and help the IAP and peers as much as I can.


----------



## YoYoSpin (Dec 20, 2004)

Wayne, the short answer is...becoming the Grand Master has little to do with pen crafting skills and everything to do with pubic service. That's the way the program was set up and intended. I think it would be a noble and ambitious goal for anyone to pursue. 

I'd be opposed to reducing the number of certs (merit badges) needed, but wouldn't mind a bit if we added another one, two or three. So, put your thinking caps on and make some recommendations.


----------



## Gary Max (Dec 20, 2004)

I am with Fred on this one. I am came here to learn how to make a product that I can be proud of. The bottom line is the customer is my judge.


----------



## low_48 (Dec 20, 2004)

I'm against the whole idea of putting titles after our names. I'm afraid this will intimidate new members and they may be afraid to post. I know the change says this will optional, but we have had comments in our woodworking club about this subject. After listening and watching the near professional levels of some, the beginner is afraid to speak up. Maybe it will be easier to type than speak up, but I know it will intimidate some. 

Rich


----------



## KKingery (Dec 20, 2004)

I have to agree with Rich on this one - As a new turner, and mostly as a hobby, I don't see the need to have titles, etc..for folks. Let's face it, wether you've done this for 20 years, or 1 month, we're all basically still turners. As a newbie, I've already sold the required amount for grand whatever, - that requirement makes no sense. Just my 2 cents worth, but I voted against it.


----------



## dougle40 (Dec 20, 2004)

Rich makes a very good point there . I know that I've been intimadated a few times when I've gone into something and everyone else has been at it for a while . You almost feel afraid to ask questions for fear that they will think of you as some kind of dummy .


----------



## Fred in NC (Dec 20, 2004)

The final verdict will come from the membership. Whether the amendment is approved or not, it is up to the individual to submit the work and ask for the awards.  I believe, correct me if I am wrong, that a person can continue to be a member of IAP, and even become an officer even without participation in the awards program.  

Membership in the AAW is open to all who are interested in wood turning.  IAP is the same for those interested in penturning.  Participation in any programs is, and should remain, totally voluntary.  The day the character of this group changes into a closed society with hierachies it will cease to grow, and probably to exist. I don't believe this will happen !!!


----------



## YoYoSpin (Dec 20, 2004)

Fred, you are exactly correct, in all respects. 

There is only one legitimate reason for having a program like this...to provide a motivational tool for our membership. For some, motivation is not required, and greatness, or at least the best they can do, will be achieved on their own. For others, they may only excel when a challenge is present. If an endorsement program encourages one person to learn something that they would not have learned otherwise, then the program has served us well.


----------



## Daniel (Dec 20, 2004)

I support Ed in his comments,
the only way anyones work will be considered for an endorsment level is if they intentionally submit it. the endorsment program is something each individual can choose to participate in or not. and in no way reflects on your ability to participate or be a mamber of the I.A.P.
I see the program as a way to move a beginner from the timidness the may have into a place they will interact more. I know that some extremely accomplished penturners have expressed no desire for it at all as well.It is a personnal choice.


----------



## Fred in NC (Dec 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by YoYoSpin_
> <br />We've heard these concerns before, but no recommendations for additional or different objective criteria have ever been proposed. If you have some ideas, please post them here.



These recommendations will come in due time.  

For one thing, those living in other countries could qualify under other associations _<u><b>similar</b></u>_ to the AAW.


----------



## Glenn McCullough (Dec 20, 2004)

I think 1,2,6,7&8 should be retained for Grand master status as well as #1 be altered to some charitable time teaching the art of penturning. 

   I feel required charity donations negates its intent. 

Charity work should be voluntary and considered independently,perhaps sharity hours accumulated may replace board sitting status, etc. I have a full time job and am trying to start a penmaking business. I have very little time for charity with two kids in college. It doesnt mean I dont have charitable desires. Do I have to be retired to have enough time to hold grand master status?


----------



## knottyharry (Dec 20, 2004)

I can certainly see both side of this discussion. As for myself, I like the idea.
I do think there are people who want and need motivation. And if it is something that helps you to learn then it's a good thing.
It is strictly optional for those who want to participate in it.
But I think the last objective could be very hard to meet, reguardless of how much a person wanted to accomplish it.
There are several aspects of the last objective that a person just could not do. And some because of geographical location.
Myself like some of the rest of you have no clubs locally, and having a full sized lathe, opposed to a mini lathe, there is no way that I could take my lathe anywhere to give a demonstration with it. As for ever having any of my work published to a magazine. The chances are pretty slim. Which doesn't leave much.
Also time is going to be a big issue to a lot of people.
As Ed stated, it is geared to community service. And yes I would like to see other options added to the list. And I will see if I can come up with some ideas.
As for giving some of my work away, I don't have a problem with that.
Seems like most of it is given away anyhow.
One question I have about this is. When does this start? Or can you go back on things you have already done in some cases. Like for example..A year ago I had an article published in a magazine. Or two years ago I gave a demonstration to a group of Boy Scouts.
Or does this go forward from time of acceptance.
Harry


----------



## Fred in NC (Dec 20, 2004)

Harry, I think your concerns are valid.  

In my way of thinking, the intent of the Grand Master level is to reward those who:

1.  Are very proficient in the craft and art of penturning.
2.  Have made a significant contribution to the craft.
3.  Have made a contribution to the community at large.

Obviously, it would be impossible to come up with a list of all possible qualifying events and contributions. I think an award at this level should be considered by the designated committe when it appears to be similar, even if not exactly, in nature to the examples in the by-laws.  

One contribution that has been left out is INVENTION.  Those who have contributed to the craft by inventing new tools, processes, etc.  The criteria in this case would be based on the usefulness of a totally new idea or tool.  This type of contribution can be made no matter where the person lives. 

Again, these matters should be considered in due time.  The amendment is being voted on right now.  We can cross that bridge when we come to it.

Please be at easy, and not worry, my friends.  Our officers are, and will take care of us.  I give them a vote of confidence.


----------



## woodwish (Dec 20, 2004)

Personally it doesn't make much difference to me whether we do this or not.  I voted for it only because others seem to want the titles, I'm happy being known as "Ray, the woodturning nut" around here.  In looking over the list I see no problem with the first three levels if a person workd hard to improve their skills.  The fourth level is what bothered me, I have no intention of selling my pens because this is just a hobby to me.  I have given away most of the ones I made as gifts or charity.  Some that I gave to charity received pretty good money as auction items, would that count?  Although I agree with others that the top level is difficult, but it should be so I have no real problem (actually I already think I meet three of them[^]).

Bottom line is that I have no better suggestions so I guess this is all fine if it is what the membership wants.


----------



## low_48 (Dec 20, 2004)

I agree with all the discussions. Very good points are being brought up. That was my intention, to bring up another point of discussion. I wish we could have two titles the same, I mean I thought Rich "the woodturning nut" was just a local title for me.[] Maybe I'll have to use the title off the Honeymooners, that was in Ralph's club. I shall be called Rich "The Grand High Exalted Majestic Ruler" of the burl pile. Hey, I'm not that old, I saw it on the reruns! Honest!

Rich


----------



## wpenm (Dec 20, 2004)

I must agree with Fred. I let my customers determine what skill level I have achieved.I became a member to exchange ideas and communicate with others interested in penturning. I do not like my skill level being challenged for a title that I may or may not be able to obtain.

I submitted a pen to a group that determined it's membership by the so called skill level and it was turned down. They said the leather grip looked uneven or something like that. What was actually judged was my photography skills. That same type of pen remains one of my top sellers.

Enough of my thoughts.
Garry


----------



## Fred in NC (Dec 20, 2004)

Garry, with all due respect to those here who might belong to that group, I did not bother to apply.  Enough said.


----------



## Gary Max (Dec 20, 2004)

I have figured out how to make a buck off this if it is passed---hehe.
You would be able to add this information as part of your sales pitch.
Yes Sir I am a menber of IPA and a (-------) penturner.
Heck might sell a few more because we all know the story helps the sale.
Heck a small sign on the table----IAP member (--------) penturner
You could figure out a way to make it work.

Oh Garry---I would never want to be a judge---never going to make everyone happy. I entered the contest to improve my skills not to win a prize.


----------



## wayneis (Dec 20, 2004)

Gary you are on point in a way.  Putting the IAP logo and a status level on a business card tell's the customer that you are  accomplished and recognized in the craft of penturning.  It is a sales tool, or could be if the org. gains the credibility to make it so.


----------



## J. Fred Muggs (Dec 20, 2004)

I voted in favor of.  Perhaps more than 8 options could be offered for the "Grand Poobah" rank, or perhaps fewer of the 8 required.  But, I, for one believe the highest rank should be attainable by only the few who are indeed carrying penturning to new dimensions.  It seems to me that all levels prior to Grand Master Penturner are the ones recognizing quality and pen turning ability and the ultimate level is for those who go beyond.

Frankly, I qualify now, if I submit pictures, for Master Professional Penturner. But, It'll be a long time, if ever, before I qualify for the top rank.  And That's quite alright with me.


----------



## RussFairfield (Dec 20, 2004)

I think that most of these messages are missing the intent of the title, "Grand Master Penturner". There is a general opinion that the qualifications should be watered down to make the rank more easily attainable. I am of the opposite opinion. They may not be difficult enough.[]

This is for the person who has attained the level of "Master Penturner", and then stands above that august group.  How many "Grand Masters" can there be at one time? One? Two? Not more than 4 or 5 at the most.  This was never intended to be a large group. Yes, the qualifications are difficult, and impossible for some. They should be. If they were easy, then everyone could attain this highest level. Should that be the case, What would be the meaning of the title "Grand Master"? 

[)]


----------



## Fred in NC (Dec 20, 2004)

Ah, Russ..... The NOBEL PRIZE of PENTURNING !

Russ, I seriously respect you as a master craftsman who has indeed made a significant contribution to penturning.  As a matter of fact, the web page in your signature was a springboard and launching pad for my penturning efforts.  Thus, I think you are one of the rare individuals who is already qualified for the royal title of Grand Master Penmaker.

However, in reading the bylaws of this organization, I don't believe it was the intention of our founding fathers to make this a closed society with an unattainable higher hierarchy.  Given minor accomodations for geographical reasons, I sincerely believe that the goal of attaining the Grand Master level is within reach of most of our active members.  Yes, it will take a lot of effort and perseverance to get there, but for those willing to persist it is not impossible. 

At least in America, Russ, we don't believe in liveries or worshipful companies.  That, in my humble understanding, is the reason why IAP was created.  Equal opportunity for all who are willing to wait... as long as they work hard while they wait.

Very respectfully,

Fred in NC


----------



## RussFairfield (Dec 20, 2004)

Participation in "The Program" is VOLUNTARY. Nothing is required, nothing is bestowed. It will be interesting to see how many applications are received.


----------



## Daniel (Dec 21, 2004)

there is a bit of a flaw in the previous comments.
one the board did not write the endorsment program. the By Law committe did. so the trail of self serving does not hold up.
second the board was not directed to re-evaluate the endorsments it was directed to hold this vote on them. as for not hearing the membership. the vote at this time is 81% in favor of the endorsments as they are written all comments are welcome and appreciated but please keep nettiquet in mind as you form you comments.


----------



## DCBluesman (Dec 21, 2004)

It's time for my voice to be heard on this.  If you search through the active and archived posts, this program has been the subject of several hundred posts.  There has been considerable disagreement over 1) whether or not to even have an endorsement program, 2) how many levels of endorsement should there be, 3) how should endorsements be established, 4) how should endorsement applications be handled, and on and on.

For a period of time, I had very serious misgivings on the program and it's implementation.  Then I did the research.  There continues to be a major outcry for an endorsement program.  The program, as written and now before the membership for voting, has been the subject over a number of serious and, occasionally heated, debates.  When you go through each and every post, as I have now done twice, you find that for the most part this program captures the bulk of what is wanted.  It was even revised in September in accordance with some suggestions by the membership.

Now, after these many, many months, YOUR Board took up the matter so as to not delay it further.  We have all taken the months of posts to heart.  We have all discussed and re-discussed the suggestions and comments.  We also made the decision, <u>unanimously</u>, to put the existing program to the membership for vote.  This was not done haphazardly, nor was it done in any self-serving way.  I would venture to say that there are other Board members, like myself, who in no way qualify for the Grand Master title...nor would any one of us finagle our way to such status.  

This is not an elitist club that is being formed.  It is an opportunity for the members to be measured against a set of established criteria.  If you do not wish to be judged, there is no pressure or impetus to do so.  This program is voluntary.  I repeat, <u>this program is voluntary</u>.  The measurements may not be to each individual's liking, but let me assure you that from the scores of posts which I have read, they are a fair and reasonable grouping and they represent our diverse membership pretty darned well. OUR Board and its predecessor committees have done a magnificent job with a near impossible task.

Now, I do not expect the members to agree with all of the endorsement program on a component-by-component basis, but I would like to remind you that WE elected these good people only a scant month or so ago.  They have dedicated a significant amount of time and energy into this organization.  If you believed in them enough to elect them, I believe you owe it to them to support them in a fair and reasonable manner.  Agree or disagree over programs...vote with or against them in proceedings like this... but never, <u>ever</u> question their dedication.  Never, <u>ever</u> look upon their actions as self-serving.  I can attest to the fact that they look out for each individual member, for each one of YOU,  even to their own sacrifice.

Vote your heart.  Vote your mind.  Then please rejoin the group which garners the largest number of votes and let's put this organization back to work for us!


----------



## DCBluesman (Dec 21, 2004)

Drew, while I prefer to keep posts away from the personal, I find I must respond to several elements in your last post.

First, you comment "if you read the replies".  I can assure you that I have read and re-read them.  I believe the count of the number of replies to THIS poll who think the GMP requirements are not well thought out, is 3.  Others may have nits to pick, but I only see three truly opposed comments.

In terms of your judgement that the results of 8 months of on and off work on this issue appearing to be "unreasonable, elitist, and not related to ones ability to turn a pen", as has been stated before, that was NOT the exclusive intent of the program.  Service to our craft, service to our organizations and service to our community were also held to be desirable qualifications for recognition.  If these qualifications appear to have all of the negative connotations that you bring up, why are the votes running 80% in favor?

As for whether or not the Board considered removing a requirement that YOU believe is bad, please be very careful where you tread on this ice.  We have ALL, every Board member and every Officer, read these posts.  And read them often.  We know disagreements exist.  The fact that you have not prevailed in your disagreement is no reason to take a pot shot at us for being "apparently unaware they existed."  We know they existed.  They did not outweigh the wants of the majority.

As for re-writing the by-laws, I personally have no stomach for it.  A group of sincere, dedicated, knowledgeable and tallented people worked all kinds of hours to put the by-laws together.  They were voted on and approved by an overwhelming majority of our membership less than four months ago.  I do not know what stand others may take, but I will work vigorously to use what we have, making modifications only where it is the clear intent of the majority that changes need to be made for the preservation or betterment of the group.  

As for "circling the wagons", factually speaking, there is not a single person on this Board who is too timid to speak their mind.  We disagree regularly.  We discuss.  We debate.  We deliberate.  We move...move the organization forward.  We do our darnedest to do it in a manner that is consistant with the desires of the majority of the members.  

Speaking from a perspective of vision into the recent efforts of Scott, Jeff, Ed, Don, Daniel and Bev, I can assure you and the entire membership that they are serving the constituency with great integrity, sincerity and dedication.  And I personally am offended by any comment that tries to make them out to be less.


----------



## Daniel (Dec 21, 2004)

I served on both the by-law committe, as well as now serving on the board. I am a personal witness to the concern and conversation to meet the overall  desires of this group. each and every member demonstrated there desire to represent the group. often discussions where taken up amoung the group for the direct pourpose of getting there input. discussions that the committe could very well have lived without the burdon of. the endorsment program does not reflect the desires of a few. not amoung the committe, the board or the membership. it shows what we assertained was the overall view of the entire membership. the vote so far speaks to the quality we put into that work, and the insuing discussion reflects the comments in which we had to formulate the "Group Consensus"
there are those that feel strongly at each end of this issue and then there is the middle ground. I believe that ground was squarly landed in and the groups responce is indicating that. 
the Board itself could not have less power in deciding this issue. it was written before the board existed. and it's approval is up to the group. We simply got handed the responsibilty to put it up for a vote and carry out what that vote mandates.
At the time these program was written no one had time to be concerned about who would and would not be on the board. it was clear to everone that was a decision the group would make. those of us that served on the committe stressed over and over the importance of the election of there board members. that important issues would be handled by them. even with such a low turnout at the election. i have found that we have a fine group of very self sacraficing individuals. they clearly have the well being of this group foremost in there thoughts. To attack them in an attempt to shed negative light on this program is offensive to me as well. one concern that was descussed many times amoung the By-Law committe. was guarding against the ability of any minority opinion to take over the will of the group. Including the minority that constitutes the Board.


----------



## Scott (Dec 21, 2004)

Howdy!

I thought I should post on this issue so you'd all know I was still alive!

I appreciate the lively discussion on this issue!  Both sides!  Drew has forcefully opposed the Grand Master portion of the program, and you know what?  I respect him for that!  He makes me look at things with a new perspective.

But it doesn't change the fact that I am for the Endorsement Program as it is written.  Is it because I might qualify as Grand Master Exhaulted Poobah already, and I desperately want this title?  I don't think so!  I probably won't participate in the program unless the Board votes to participate as a means of supporting it.

I am for the program because it encourages our members to do more.  To try new things and enjoy penturning more.  I have no problem with any of the levels, including the Grand Master, because it gives a small reason for a person to do those things.  To turn a new kind of pen.  To volunteer for a demonstration or whatever if they can.  In my mind it is simply a tool to help bring out the best that is in us all.  Many won't need this tool, but some may.  Who cares, as long as we have fun and learn a few new things!

The one thing I am not for is using the endorsement program as a marketing tool.  Being set up as an educational tool does not qualify it as a certification that would mean a hoot in marketing.  I would see those who use it for marketing as selling a hollow promise.  There's no way we can certify your skills as a penturner from a picture you send us over the Internet!

So there's my opinion.  Keep discussing this.  Agree or disagree!  Vote your will in this important ammendment to  our By-Laws!  And lets keep everything civil here - we can all learn something from each other!

Scott.


----------



## jeff (Dec 21, 2004)

I know that we struggled with the naming of the program. We ended up with "endorsement", but following your logic, Scott (with which I completely agree), we're really not "endorsing" a member's skills.  We're just recognizing an accomplishment.  Perhaps calling it an endorsement gives it weight as a marketing tool, which should not be the intent. 

Unless we create a category for penturning web site management, I probably won't participate either. [] I've logged way too much keyboard time and not enough chisel time lately to produce much more than an ugly pen entry!


----------



## timdaleiden (Dec 21, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Scott_
> <br />The one thing I am not for is using the endorsement program as a marketing tool.
> Scott.



  Scott, 

   I thought that it was renamed "The Skill Recognition Program". I may have missed something though. Anyway, I don't see any reason why the program can't serve duel purposes. As you (and others) have stated, the customer is the final judge of someones work. 

  I agree. 

  OTOH, who would want a Dentist, Doctor, or Lawyer that doesn't have diploma (or certificate) on their wall? 

  Maybe we are all getting a bit too "worked up" about this. Some of us know that this all started with a whimsical idea proposed in an e-mail exchange. Who would have thought that it would evolve into an actual thingy?

  Anyway, no matter what comes of it, and what purpose it serves, you, Jeff, and others have made this an interesting place to be. 

 Thank you!!!


----------



## bnosie (Dec 21, 2004)

> The Board is sending the wrong message and their lack of flexibility and unwillingness to request input from the membership resulted in their making a decision that did not place adequate value on encouraging members, whether they be a novice or an expert, to support good causes through penturning.



But Drew, Ed did request member input in this very topic:



> We've heard these concerns before, but no recommendations for additional or different objective criteria have ever been proposed. If you have some ideas, please post them here.


----------



## jeff (Dec 21, 2004)

So, Drew.  Do you propose eliminating the GMP or changing the requirements?  If the latter, what exactly would you suggest?  A list would be great to see! THANKS.


----------



## penhead (Dec 21, 2004)

Trying to stay away from this thread, about to fail that task, but definately not agreeing with some of what is being said...first all, let me say, that I voted _for_ this "Skill Recognition Program"...and that I may or maynot participate..I will participate if we can make this a _fun_ thing to do.

There will be people new to 'pen' turning, but who may have been turning other items for all their lives...how long will it take for them to learn to turn a pen and gain another level of skill recgonition....and their will be people new to turning never having turned a piece of wood before....people who have already turned hundreds of pens and those who cant wait to turn their first....my point is that the skill recognition should _only_ be used as some form of recognizing those that wish to judge where they started and where they want to be.

My wife still has the first pen I turned a year ago, and when I sold my first hundred dollar pen just a couple of weeks ago, she brought it out to show me, and asked what I was going to do for next.

At this time, my life is way to busy to consider some form of club officer...there just isn't time, and any of those positions require numerous hours..and there have been chances to become a club officer in the local club because not many people with that postion _because of_ the huge amount of time required.

I suggestion maybe to consider (or reconsider) though, is the name of the Grand Master Pernturning Poobah.  Since this position is really more about helping other people and/or management, and is really the first level of same, maybe it should be renamed something like "apprentice"...or something else that signifies the lower level of managing instead of the higher level of turning.

Just my nickle back,
JohnPayton


----------



## Daniel (Dec 21, 2004)

two of the posts have several statements I would like to comment on.
I will copy and past the portions of the posts I am refering to.

I know that a whole thread of criticism existed about the program as a whole, and many of the comments were about the "Grand Master", including comments by me.

I am very awaire of the previous comments. I as also very awaire of the overwhelming support of the endorsment program. as this vote is indicating exists then and even now. 

I still think given that there was strong concern that the requirements for the "Grand Master Penturner" are not skill specific

this level was intentionally non skill specific. it is focused on service to the penturning community. recently I have seen comment after comment about how someone has joined this group, learned so much in such a short time, how much there skill has improved, etc. this is only possible due to those that already can, being willing to pass on there knowledge and incouragment. whatever you get here came freely. and it should also be given freely. that is at least my thinking when helping write this endorsment. I do think there are other things that can be considered along this line. 
Skill is addressed in the proceeding endorments.
with the skills that are addressed in the other endorsment. what would you suggest be added to the grand master in the way of Skill requirments?

the board should have asked for input from the membership which has grown significantly since the by-laws were written.

This is exactly what this vote is. it was also taken to the group in discussions.
exactly what you are saying should have happened, is what happened and is what is happening. you either don't accept the method as good enough, or are not satisfied with the results I am not sure which. Not getting your way does not mean we did not follow these steps. I realize you are strong in your opinion. I am strong in mine as well. and neither of us are getting it our way. When I read this paragraph I get the picture of the intire membership haveing a say in every point in the endorsment program, and the by-laws even. this would have been an impossibility. this is why a committee was formed to write them in the first place.
and once again. whatever that committee did to consult the group as a whole was obviously well done. regardless of the growth of the group. it is still showing the quality of finding that medium ground.

the board should have asked for input from the membership which has grown significantly since the by-laws were written. I am a strong opponent of lets do it quick damned be the consequences approach to management

Drew, to be honest it is stament like this that cause me to just want to drop the discussion with you and consider you an antagonist. I know better from past experiences. So allow me to explain.
You claim we are moving to fast consequences be dammed immeditely after pointing out that the group has already changed to much for any of this to be relevant. just what do you propose be done within those perameters?
in effect you are saying we are doing this to fast and that is not fast enough. 
in fact you are very wrong. the thinking that the group has changed significantly falls apart when you look at the results of this vote so far. also the by-laws where a very long time in being written. and the endorsment program was a significant portion of that time. 
you continue to stress that the board should have consulted the membership in one way or anouther. again I will point out. the Board did not write these. the board did not exist when they where written, so I fail to see how the board could have taken it to the members. It is the By-Law Committee that these comments should be directed to. 

Many people are voting in favor of the Skill Recognition Program because they plan to use it for marketing purposes for their pens

How would you know why people are voting? do you have messages you can point out that show this? have you had e-mail conversations with them?
phone conversations? I have missed whatever indicates this to you.
If this is simply out of your gut thinking, here is mine, I think the group just likes checking boxes and got all excited about anouther box to check. and then there is always the thrill of getting to see the pretty gold bars that say something about something on this group. but who cares about all those details. I can guess all day long. but that is not what the committee did. they went out and got a since of what the group was really wanting. I do not think i have seen one comment from anyone at any time that did not stand against the use of the endorsment program as a tool to promote the sales of there pens. across the board this has been the stance of this group. are there individuals that will anyway. most likely. the Consensus of this group tells me it will be addressed and is not the intent of the endorsment program. I will ad my thinking on this issue. are we going to be concerned that someone will use a Finish they discoverd here to promote the products. or an outright design for a pen, or anything else they gained from this group. lastly, I have never seen anyone blatantly or consistantly take advantage of anything this group does. I do not think that the endorsment program is going to have such power over the members of this group that they cannot resist taking advantage of such an opportunity. I have had many interactions with penturnes as a whole, in trading, selling, freedom of there advice and ideas. not only as a group but to a person. I have found them more than honest. they will pay more if they even suspect you would come up short. they give freely, and they will make sure things turn out right. they will send nore than you bought. they will worry that you will not be happy or didn't get what you expected. and they will praise you for every little thing you didn't even realize you did. I'm sorry but I don't think I will be getting worried about them taking advantage any time soon. 
I do alot to help this group be what I see it can be, that I want it to be. this is not the only group I belong to. I belong to Music groups, gardening groups, church groups, and many others. It is this group that I choose to pour myself heart and soul into. Why? because of the nature of it's members. this group and others like it are friendly, giving and I can trust them. across the board and I have never come across an exception. Arguments yes, but that only shows that these things matter.
I will take someone that cares enough to get upset over the ones that don't care at all any day.
I do not expect we will agree on this issue. but much of what you say should have happened, did happen, Is happening.
 as for your point #3. the whole thing.
I get lost while trying to read it. it sort of has a weaving in on itself effect for me. making it hard to decifer just what you re saying.
so I will write what i get from it.
If charity is important why is it not incouraged in the other levels as well.
Good question. My first thought on this is that it has to be learned to be taught. but htis only covers teaching and demonstrations. as far as the giving of pens. you are right anyone that can make a pen can also give them away. the previous endorsments are focused on the development of penturning skills. the master level is focused on returning what you got to the community. this is why I can see that charity got lumped into this last one. in counter argument. the last endorsment will be known to anyone before they ever start the program. the final endorsment is not somehting you will achive by focusing on it at the end of the rest. it is something you will achieve along the way. it has more to do with your nature than your skill.
as a writer of the endorsment program. I think we struck the best ground with this endorsment than any other. for what we where trying to develop.
It is not to easy, it is not to hard, and I don't think you could achieve it without really having the qualities I had in mind.


----------



## woodwish (Dec 21, 2004)

Daniel, well said!


----------



## DCBluesman (Dec 21, 2004)

The excellent point about additional qualifications for international equivalents of AAW will be addressed by the Board and the review committee if the proposal passes.  We will try to be more diligent in losing our US-centricity.  Please be patient as old habits die hard.  [8D]


----------



## wayneis (Dec 21, 2004)

If you knew nothing about penturning and you heard the term "Grand Master Penturner" what would you think that it refered to.

Someone who donates most of his/her free time to helping others?

Someone who is a extremely talented pen crafter?

Wayne


----------



## RussFairfield (Dec 21, 2004)

As one of the Committee that wrote the By-Laws, I would like to add my perspective on the Skill Recognition Program, the title of Grand Master, and some of the other questions that are now being raised. I assure everyone that this is not the first time that these same issues have been discussed, nor will it be the last. 

In the beginning, I was ambivalent about any "Program" because I would choose not to participate. However, I did the same thing as Lou. I read all of the messages that had been posted on the topic. One thing was clear. The majority of the membership who cared enough to voice an opinion were in favor of some type of "program". The result is the best effort of the By-Laws Committee, not the Board of Directors.

A "self-serving" Board? We all had our chance at running for the Board. I recognize only 2 of the Board as being members of that committee, and I would prefer to believe that they were elected because of their active presence on the forums, rather than any self-serving personal motives. Several Board members were unknown to me at the time we wrote the ByLaws, but they were rather vocal in their questioning of them after they were published. 

I have never been concerned about someone using a skill level title (or whatever we call it), for commercial or self serving purposes. While our intention was that the "Program" would not be used for selling a product or personal services, it is a fact of life that some people will use them for those purposes. The only way to prevent such personal use of title or status is to not have a "Program". 

Names are important, and I have always had a problem with what this "Program" would be called. In the beginning, it was described as a "Merit Badge", but that didn't work for me. I preferred something more professional, and not associated with the Boy Scouts. The By-Laws Committee discussed a lot of names for the program. "Endorsement" was one of them that was rejected because some believed it implied the wrong concept. As the compiler of the draft copy of the by-laws, I used "Skill Recognition" for lack of a better title. Anyone not liking the name has me to blame, not the Board of Directors. I still don't see any suggestions for a better name.

On the title of "Grand Master"....
Every organization needs some way of giving recognition for services above and beyond those of membership or skills. How do we recognize the services of a Scott Greaves (to use a name), without whose efforts the IAP wouldn't exist, and we wouldn't be having this discussion? The question then becomes one of how this should be done. Is it done through acceptance and acclamation by a self-appointed group of "Elders" as is done by the Pen Makers Guild, by an elected Board of Directors, or are there stated minimum standards for this achievement? 

It follows that we can question whether these standards are realistic, or that they should even be a part of the "Skill Recognition Program"? My answer to that is that I prefer a set of stated standards over an arbitrary award. Where should they be placed in the By-Laws? Since one of those standards for the "Grand Master" is that they have demonstrated their ability to make a pen, placing it as a part of the "Program" was the logical choice. Someone else may disagree.

Regarding a "majority of the membership".....
While this is a nice concept, the fact of life is that the majority doesn't give a damn. 

The By-Laws Committee had a lot of discussion on whether decisions should be a "majority of the membership" or some minimum number of voting members to validate an election. There was never a concensus on this issue among the Committee members. I looked at the Membership List, saw the number of those posting more than 1 or 2 messages on the forums, and then chose to use "majority of those voting" when I wrote the draft copy of the By-Laws. The numbers voting in these elections has proven that this was the proper choice of words.

While there may be 800 on the Membership List, there are less than 100 who care enough to vote. The IAP would not exist today if we had depended on a "majority of the membership".

This is one persons opinion. Feel free to disagree.


----------



## Fred in NC (Dec 21, 2004)

Well stated, Russ !

Of course, "self-appointed group of "Elders" is not what we want.  This is one reason for the existence of IAP.  We have ELECTED officers. Majority rules.  Majority of those who choose to participate.  

Setting realistic standards for Grand Master seems to be the key  issue.  I don't like the way some opinions have been stated. Obviously, not everyone will want, or even be able to reach this level. 

My main concern is that some of the rules limit eligibility of those who would otherwise be qualified.  Please understand that, AAW affiliation or not, this is an INTERNATIONAL group by definition.  Serving as an officer of the AAW is a stumbling block for those living in other parts of the world. This is just one example.  I believe this issue is being addressed by the Board at this time.    

Competence at the highest level is what Master Penmaker is about. I understand that to get to Grand Master, a person will have to do some service, like teaching, writing, service, etc.  Russ, you have done a lot of that already !  

Limitations on who might achieve this level are unfair.  Few will achieve it, but anybody who is willing to do what is needed should have a fair chance.  Who is to say that teaching on TV is less important than teaching at a local meeting?  Writing a book less important than an AAW article?  See what I mean?  The intent of a rule cannot always cover all bases.

Respectfully submitted as my freely expressed OPINION.


----------



## ilikewood (Dec 21, 2004)

Hi Russ, 

I have yet to respond to any of the forum here just to see what people would think.  Although a supporter of the "program", I see that it could incorporate many problems that will need to be addressed.  You have eloquently described them in detail.  Your opinion is well respected here and should be considered and pondered by all.

My greatest fear for this program has always been "the good old boys syndrome" where others of the "elite" judge others.  Considering my run in's with the Guild and the lack strict of guidelines, this program will have to be modified on the run many times to remove these problems.  Judging is opinion, and there are those that have different standards that differ from the others (hense the problems with the guild)  I submitted a pen to the Guild that fulfilled the guidelines and was rejected because they "didn't like the style".  Getting the judging down will be the hardest item and to standardize the "opinions".  It may not be possible, but I do think that we should give it a try.

I chose not to run for the board as I am currently swamped with life and wouldn't be able to offer my services to the level required (just to let you know why I wasn't on the ballot).


----------



## YoYoSpin (Dec 21, 2004)

Drew, I think you have me confused with someone else...: "I'm sorry I guess you didn't read the post by YoYoSpin that said the board reviewed past posts and this is the first time anyone has ever expressed dissatisfaction..." The tone of this whole discussion makes me very sad.


----------



## esheffield (Dec 21, 2004)

I haven't voted on this yet, but I'm probably going to vote for it. I do share some of the reservations with the "Grand Master" mentioned previously, but I don't see them as complete show-stoppers. Since I don't like complaining without making suggestions when possible, here are a few things that came to mind.
<ol type="1">
[*]Most of the concerns seem to center around the criteria related to board and/or officer participation. Perhaps collapsing points 4, 5, and 6 into a single criteria would help. Write the single criteria to be nation-neutral. Perhaps drop the requirement that the local club would have to be affiliated with a nationally recognized group, at least for members from nations having no national group.<br />
[*]If 4, 5, and 6 remain separate, at add a clarification that you cannot count the same term of office for more meeting more than one criteria. For example if serving on the IAP board makes you a member of the AAW board, you could count your first term as fulfilling point 4 and only if reelected use the second term to fulfill point 5.<br />
[*]As suggested by another member, add a criteria for contributing a new Invention (including a new Technique) to the craft.<br />
[*]The publishing requirements are OK, but should perhaps either be combined into a single criteria or clarified that the articles must be unique. If you have two articles published in a magazine that ALSO publishes them on their web site, you can count them as one or the other, but not both.<br />
[*]Some criteria recognizing "mentoring" or other penturning community contributions. For example someone who frequently posts on the forum helping others and is generally recognized by the membership as an outstanding source of help. I've seen something like this on another forum, though I can't remember which. Members could nominate someone as a mentor (or something similar) and either the board or membership would vote on bestowing that standing. This would be a good way for someone who is perhaps handicapped or otherwise would have difficulty doing demonstrations to have their contributions recognized. Hope that makes some sense.<br />
</ol id="1">
Generally I don't have any problem with the intent of the program, nor with the idea that the top level should be difficult to obtain. But it shouldn't be impossible due to some geographic or physical constraint. 5 out of 8 criteria is OK too, but the criteria should be more diverse. As currently written, due to similarity and overlap, it feels more like 4 criteria than 8.

Two other minor comments on the wording describing the other levels. For the Pencrafter and Master Penturner levels it mentions obtaining "awards". I think "meeting criteria" would be a better phrasing. Also the naming seems a little inconsistent. From Penturner to Pencrafter to Master Penturner and up. Perhaps Penturner should only be used at the first level and all higher levels use Pencrafter.

Eddie


----------



## YoYoSpin (Dec 21, 2004)

Eddie,

Those are all excellent suggestions, and one's that should be seriously considered by all. I like the new invention criteria mentioned earlier as well.


----------



## DCBluesman (Dec 21, 2004)

Russ...when things get real quiet for you tonight, should you happen to hear a pair of hands applauding, they will be mine.  Thank you.


----------



## Daniel (Dec 21, 2004)

Eddie,
 you have some very good points and suggestions. I believe this program has alot of adjustments to make before ti settles into anything that would be concidered complete. I am going to save a copy of your comments as well as those of Drew in order to refresh myself on what itmes need to be tweaked. or considerd for tweaking. the statments that not enough time has been spent on this issue are quite valid. not enough time has even elapsed yet. this time needs to be considered a portion of that tally. the comments are being heard. and these things will be taken under consideration. By the Board? I don't know, I for one hope not or plates are full. can the committe that Drew mentioned and desires to serve on still transpire. well I for one would hope that is the method it does get done. There is much to much to do to expect the board to come out with a draft that will satisfy everyone, or be totally void of errors. but the board exists to insure that the members will always have the ability to change what they do not like.


----------



## RussFairfield (Dec 21, 2004)

I'm not sure that opening up this box again will serve any useful purpose. 

To steal a line from a famous quotation - 
You can please most of the people most of the time, and some of the people some of the time. Trying to please all of the people all of the time will be a futile effort because there will always be those who are never pleased. You do the best you can, and move on.

Isn't it time to take what you have, and move on??


----------



## Daniel (Dec 21, 2004)

Russ,
 I want to thank you for involving yourself in this. you are a great level mind. and you are right. I am not sure it isn't all just lending fire to the flame. I think you say best what has been on my mind from the start of this whole conversation. not all can be pleased.


----------



## Mac In Oak Ridge (Dec 22, 2004)

So tell me, is a person who cannot afford to purchase a digital camera not going to be able to qualify for one of the exalted ranks?


----------



## bnosie (Dec 22, 2004)

Why not send pens in to be judged.  Then you are taking the photography element out of it.  After all, it is the pens being judged, why not see the pens?


----------



## Gary Max (Dec 22, 2004)

Mac---even better than that.
Hey--- what if a person can not afford a computer---does that mean they can not be
-- the exalted.
And what about the homeless they may want to be exalted


----------



## jeff (Dec 22, 2004)

Bill - Early in the discussions, I recall someone raised the possibility of examining the actual pens.  The problem there is logistics, I think.  Nobody is going to be happy with just one person's eyeballs on it, and sending it around to multiple evaluators would get expensive and time-consuming.  I can't imagine that a committee of volunteer evaluators would have the stamina to deal with receiving, evaluating, and re-shipping what would likely be hundreds of pens. 

I suppose that does require that one have a digital camera, but so many people own them these days that I'd bet someone without one could get a photo taken by a friend.


----------



## bnosie (Dec 22, 2004)

I understand that, and totally agree.  I just would hate for somebody to "not make the grade" because they can't take a good picture.


----------



## jeff (Dec 22, 2004)

Gary - I know you're trying to make a point with "exalted", but it's just unnecessary gasoline on the fire in my opinion.  I can tell you that nobody who has worked on this program at any point feels that it should convey any sort of status, fame, fortune, or other exalted position.  It was supposed to be a fun component of education in the craft and advancement of skills.

Let me make one general comment, then I'll let you all have at it while I go back to tweaking the software to make this a more efficient and enjoyable place for you all to argue. []

I'm really amazed that a simple idea for a fun thing to do has turned into such a mess.  I remember discussing this with Scott and a couple others about a year ago.  It went something like, "wouldn't it be fun to have some kind of awards for accomplishments in different areas of penturning."  Let me say, folks, this is anything but fun right now.

My # 1 rule for success is to "use all the help you can get".  In order for us to be successful in continuing to build a quality organization that will help us ALL improve our skills, we need your help! One form of help certainly is dissent for things you oppose, but the right way to leverage your position is to offer concrete suggestions on alternatives.  Personal attacks don't move us forward, they only kick up a lot of dust that prevents us from seeing good solutions.

Please, let's continue this discussion.  We're up to five pages on this topic, and I'd like to see five or fifty more pages of calm, respectful dialogue.  Can I ask you all a personal favor?  In exchange for the hundreds of hours I've put in to give us all a place to share what we know and learn from others, can we tone it down a couple notches? I won't ask for anything else for Christmas.


----------



## jeff (Dec 22, 2004)

> _Originally posted by bnosie_
> <br />I understand that, and totally agree.  I just would hate for somebody to "not make the grade" because they can't take a good picture.


Absolutely!  You make a great point, Bill.  I remember failing a high school biology test because I could not draw some single cell blob.  I knew what it was, I just can't draw!

I would hope that anyone evaluating a person's work would recognize a bad photo and work with that person to perhaps get another picture or somehow take the bad picture quality out of the equation.


----------



## timdaleiden (Dec 22, 2004)

> _Originally posted by bnosie_
> <br />I understand that, and totally agree.  I just would hate for somebody to "not make the grade" because they can't take a good picture.



  Bill, 

   This is a great group of people here. I have no doubts, that if you can't get your hands on a digital camera, or a scanner that can do the job, ask for a bit of help, and someone will help you out. If you are willing to pay a few dollars for postage, someone will volunteer to help.


----------



## dougle40 (Dec 22, 2004)

> I suppose that does require that one have a digital camera,


A digital camera isn't really a necessity .A regular camera with film will do .
With to-days technology all one has to do is have prints made and scan them into their computers . For those who don't have scanners , you could also take your film to a photo finisher that will copy the pics onto a disc . An awful lot of them offer this service now .


----------



## Daniel (Dec 22, 2004)

Bill,
 I have seen this question come up in regard to other situations. such as contests and other evaluation situations. to a large extent being an inernet group we deal in pictures and words. so yes some interaction is going to require pictures abtained in some manner. the photographing your pens forum has some suggested methods, advice on getting good pictures with a digital camera s well as how to scan pens. but the bottom line is it adds one more thing to be learned or borrowed to the pile. of course there are many more reasons to tackle this issue than just the endorsment program. I know for me the desire to get a decent picture of my pens was to be able to show them off. I think this could be a consistant problem with first level though. at least having some available advice how to tackle it needs to be in place. I see new people all the time telling about there latest pen followed by a comment simular to. as soon as I can get a decent picture... the next would be as soon as I can figure out how to post this picture... close kin to this picture doesn't look the same on your sight as it does on my computer. Possibly some detailed instructions for anyone interested in starting the program. step by step as much s possible.


----------



## timdaleiden (Dec 22, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Kim_
> <br />So are you boys gonna build a club house and have a secret hand shake too?
> 
> hehe



  You didn't say the secret password, which is why nobody responded to you. 

  Laugh at us if you wish, but if it wasn't for males forming groups to pursue a common goal, we wouldn't have wars, professional sports, soul murdering factories, or the Free Masons. 

  Wait a minute, I am helping you aren't I? OK, we are a silly bunch of hairy Ogre's, but when it comes to hooking up the stereo, building dwellings, killing animals for sustenance, and protecting our offspring, we have yet to be replaced by robotic facsimiles. []

  Most of us folks do not fall into totally male or female stereotypes. More and more, males are becoming nurturer's, and females are doing some of the traditionally male tasks. 

  Would you like to talk about psychology/sociology, and it's relevance to the skill recognition program? Or were you just trying to be a smarty pants?

  You obviously are very bright, and have a lot to offer, you should post your thoughts a bit more often. Just a thought.


----------



## Mac In Oak Ridge (Dec 22, 2004)

I guess, from what I see and read, that the four (it is four, isn't it) ranks of progression are fixed.

That being said.  Why not just two classes of membership here. One you join by logging on and filling out the form.  Two you become "Accomplished Pen Turner".  You do that by submitting four different pens, Slimline, American Flat Top, European Round Top and Cigar.  Or perhaps throw in a screw cap style in there somewhere. By submitting those four pens made in a workman like manner you have shown that you can perform the steps necessary to make pens.

Beyond that, if a member makes it as one out of, hummmm....something like 800 members now? Five board members?  A member makes it to the board, performs heroic acts of charity, gets published in the annals of woodworking and so on then that person and his or her accomplishments is submitted to the board and they can award a "Grand Old Man or Woman of Pen Turning", print out a nice certificate, give some prizes that our suppliers may furnish and gets his name entered in the "Roll Call of Great Pen Turners".

That way we are not creating classes of people here, just ones that want to belong and ones that want to submit proof of four pens.  Extraordinary accomplishments are then recognized in another manner.


----------



## RussFairfield (Dec 22, 2004)

I have to agree with Jeff here.

How did something that seemed so simple get so complicated??

And the first pen or photo has yet to be submitted and certified, or whatever is supposed to happen to it.

Why not just get on with "the program" and see how it works.


----------



## wayneis (Dec 22, 2004)

I have the start of an idea that may have some possibilities.  First give the some additional meaning by actually submitting a pen with say a twenty dollar entry fee and this fee would cover the cost of mailing it around to three or four judges.  Second this would be an title that could actually be something that could be used in marketing our products like has been talked about.  With so much of the post office available on line it mould not take much for a few people to do something like this.  

It seems like there are several people who would like some kind of recognition or title to give credence to their work.

This entry fee would be $3.85 dollars per judge just to cover the cost of Priority mailing to the next judge.  I'm not positive but we may be able to set something up with a paypal account that the entrent would pay the fee into and the judges would then pay for the postage from the account.

We could have judging peramiters set up as guide lines for the judges so that each pen is judged equally and fairly.

Any input?

Wayne


----------



## mikes pens (Dec 22, 2004)

Up to now, I have followed one of my rules in life:  "It is better to remain silent and thought a fool than to speak up and remove all 
doubt".  So, now that I am speaking up, we'll see where I stand.  I have found this discussion very interesting to this point.  I should remind people that one of the problems with e-mail is that it is impersonal and people may not truly get the tone of your message.  It can be easy to misconstrue the writer's tone.  I would like to relate why I went into woodworking.  I chose this as a hobby and subsequently, I got involved in making pens.  After a short period of time, I had accumulated a number of pens.  My wife asked me what I was going to do with them - look at them?  I replied yes but soon realized that this hobby is expensive and therefore reluctantly started selling them.  I have sold alot of them - over 60 this past two months alone.  The selling of my pens, allows me to buy more woodworking supplies so that I can continue with my hobby.  The title of pen maker, crafter or whatever means little to me.  To give you an example, I was a Vice-Principal but chose to go back into the classroom because I loved teaching kids more than having the title of Vice-Principal.  Let's not get too hung up on titles.  Don't forget the reason you woodwork and make pens - the love and joy and pleasure you hopefully get from it.  I am not sure if I will submit my work for a title - maybe yes, maybe no.  That is not why I joined this site.  I joined to share and find out information.  I thought about sending a pen of mine into another site that gives people titles for their work and then I thought more and realized that I could really care less what someone else thinks of my work - it is what I think of my work that counts (and how it makes me feel).  I don't know about some of you, but I can spend lots of time in my work shop looking at blanks and just imagining what they will some day look like.  Don't forget why you woodwork - I do it for self-fullfillment and relaxation.


----------



## Scott (Dec 22, 2004)

Hi Wayne,

I thinkyour idea has merit.  If we want a certification program that means anything at all, we would need to see the pen, and not just a picture.  Those seeking recognition under the certification would be willing to pay the postage expense to have thier pens evaluated.

This is assuming the IAP wants to get into a certification program.  I'm not saying we don't, but I'm not saying we do, either!  To tell the truth, the Skill Recognition Program is before the membership now only because there was a number of requests for something like this.  If it is a true certification program that members want, I believe we could work on something like this.

This organization is a reflection of it's membership.  It would have been much easier for Jeff and I to just retain control and design it the way we wanted it.  But no matter how "broad-minded" we are, we couldn't anticipate, much less understand everyone's interests.  That's why we felt there needed to be an organization, run by members who are chosen by other members, and that decisions are made in full view of everyone.  It's also why Jeff and I decided not to run for President, because the IAP needed to be run as a democracy, not by a beneficient dictator.

This whole issue, and the discussions it has generated, are a perfect example of why we needed to do this.  As wonderful as I am (I'm really not all that wonderful - ask my Wife!) I cannot see everything.  The only reason we even started thinking in the direction of a program such as this is because Tim Dalieden suggested early on that it might be a good thing.  And it is the By-Law committee that really hammered it together.  Is it perfect?  No.  But it is a workable start.  Probably the worst thing about it is that it is being formulated as an ammendment to the by-laws, which will make it difficult to fine tune it as time goes on.

If the membership wants to defeat this proposal as an ammendment, but they do want some kind of program, it would be our obligation as the Board of Directors to try to formulate something that would be acceptable to the membership.  Your idea of a real certification program is a good one, and I think it could work.  But we're not at a point where we can add it to the proposal that is up for a vote now.  Lets finish this issue first, and then please don't let me forget to work on your proposal soon.

Scott.


----------



## timdaleiden (Dec 22, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Scott_
> <br />  The only reason we even started thinking in the direction of a program such as this is because Tim Dalieden suggested early on that it might be a good thing.  And it is the By-Law committee that really hammered it together.  Is it perfect?  No.  But it is a workable start.
> Scott.



  Actually, my idea was much simpler. Show you can make a decent pen, and you get to use the LOGO. I admit that this idea is basically stolen from the PMG, but with much lower standards. It was Jeff that thought the various levels of accomplishment might be fun. After some thought, I agreed. 

  Anyway, so many people have worked so hard on this thing, it would be a shame if it ended up in the trash. 

  I agree with Russ, turn the key, and see if it runs. It may need some tweaking, or maybe not. It may fall apart, but you will never know until you try.


----------



## darbytee (Dec 22, 2004)

I've been away for a while due to a cross-country move and a hectic schedule at work and I have to say I was a bit surprised to see a thread run this long and have a point beat about this much. It seems very simple to me: If you are interested in a title and want the marketing gimmick you should participate in the program. If you just want to turn pens and talk about turning pens participate in the forum but not the program. 

I've personally posted a lot of pics of my pens and have sold a lot of pens. I don't believe that having a title after my name is going to make me a better penturner. It will just force me to redo my business cards. I do this because I love doing it and it is a great way to relieve the stress of my job. Someone else has probably already said this or something similar but I must have missed it in the 80+ posts on this topic.


----------



## its_virgil (Dec 24, 2004)

I've been on the road and away from the internet since Monday and I return to read the new posts and WOW!. Let me catch up on the topics and maybe I'll have something to say, or maybe it has all been said. We do have a lively group here. 
Do a good turn daily!
Don


----------



## bobaltig (Dec 24, 2004)

Well, I'll chime in.  I've never felt intimidated about my penturning.  I realize I'm not as proficient as others, am better than some, and never will be as good as many.  That doesn't bother me at all or diminish my enjoyment of penturning.

As for titles, I don't need any.  Others may desire them, but as I told a former boss, change my job title to jerk if you'd like to.  As long as it pays more, I'll consider it a promotion.  Titles don't mean as much as the enjoyment friends get when I make them a pen and the sincere thank you I get back when they receive it.  Even if I were to get a title granted to me by this group, I doubt I would ever use it along with my name.  It would simply be a means of gauging my skills improvement based on the judgement of others for whom I have profound respect.

With that in mind, I have voted for the ammendment and don't really care one way or the other if my vote is anonymous.  

As for multiple voting, you can't prevent it in an online forum such as this one.  There is nothing to prevent anyone from joining under multiple usernames, giving fictitious real names and voting multiple times.  I can't see the value in concerning oneself about things over which they have no control.

Bob  [8D]


----------



## Guest (Dec 24, 2004)

DAM!
bumped into this thread too late.
For shame I'll never be a grand master!

Tim said:
"Anyway, so many people have worked so hard on this thing, it would be a shame if it ended up in the trash. "
why not,garbage is garbage.maybe you're right a better place would be the toilet.


----------

