Tom,
I have not declared that I am going to test for the CJF, just that I intend to finish the CF in the spring. I will not declare my intent. I do disagree with your premise however. The new officer structure is VP to President Elect who becomes President after a year. The VP is automatically a candidate for President Elect. But he is not the only candidate for president elect. Anyone that is in the qualified pool can run for president elect. It is not an automatic as the premise has been suggesting. The reason for the qualified pool is to insure that the candidates have some knowledge and experience in the governance process. The President Elect to President step was intended to all for the outgoing President to mentor the incoming President.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
Since an editor serves at the pleasure of an organization's heirachy, when an editor has his editor hat on, his opinions reflect the organization's official position and are found on the editorial page of the official publicaton. Should his editorials fail to reflect the "official" line of the organization, in all probability, he'll be replaced; in most cases, immediately.
Unless restricted by contract or judicial ruling, when an editor's not wearing his editor hat and expresses his personal opinion on a non-official forum, that expression is protected by the First Amendment. Put another way, Danvers ain't an editor on this forum, he's just another horseshoer with an opinion. Just like me.
I have to disagree with you on a couple of points here.
First, it is a common misunderstanding/belief that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects all speech. It does not. It protect us from the government attempting to restrict speech. See {
First Ammendment}. It is well within the bounds for any organization to restrict the speech of their employees.
Second, I disagree that everyone is going to be able to make the separation in their head that you make in yours. The AFA has been dealt a major blow to the credibility, honesty and integrity of its publication by the former publisher and editor of Professional Farrier Magazine. The AFA needs to create a set of cir***stances and conditions that leave absolutely no doubt as to the neutrality and lack of bias in its publication. Because the Managing Editor of PFM speaks with the AFA’s voice anything that he engages in that would give him an appearance that could be used to call into question his neutrality or be construed as being biased, regardless of the source, official or unofficial, is simply in my opinion not good for the credibility of PFM. Is this fair, probably not, but it is the cold hard reality of it. This is the exact point that I made to the EC and that the EC apparently agreed with. It is my hope that Mr. Child will stay on as the Managing Editor because I believe that he, above all of the other possibilities currently available, has the stature, experience and credibility to actually help reestablish the credibility of PFM as a completely neutral and unbiased reporter of fact.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
If elected, what, if anything, do you plan to do in order to further standardize the certification program?
I would support the development of internal performance measurements. These measurements would take into account every aspect of the testing process and normalize the tester pool by eliminating people that were outside the norm. Here is a simplistic example how this would work. Every tester’s scores would be tracked. Lets say that 80% of the testers give 7’s on a test, of the remainder 5% give, 5s, 6s, 8s and 9s respectively. Those that give 5s and 9s would be eliminated from the pool, those giving 6s and 8s would be run through the standardization training again. Over time you develop a pool of people that all have the same eye. Then as you develop a new way to look at the scoring process the testers you are using are significantly more likely to see it the same way and yield a more consistent result. I am currently developing a program to be used to capture and analyze this information for the certifcation committee. Mr. Nolan has seen and test a couple of early versions.
Also by knowing what the majority average is allows you to put in place safety measures at the certification exam. This way when a tester scores someone more than one point off of the norm an automatic review of the scoring can be implemented with another tester or the examiner rescoring the test. This insures that each candidate receives as much consideration and consistency as possible.
I think Rick & Dick spoke to the other issues fairly well. I do however feel that we need to emphasize returning the certification process to its roots and allow anyone that wants to test to test, regardless of their membership and that we need to restrict testers to trained testers. There is no way to insure consistency if that restriction is not in place and everyone deserves a level playing field.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
If elected, what, if anything, do you plan to do in order to make the public aware the AFA's certification program?
I think that there needs to be a comprehensive marketing program that focuses our efforts on both certification and the simple fact that we exist. I think that this is a project that need a lot of thought and that resulting plan needs to be well funded. Beyond this I am going to say that there is not enough know right no to say what that plan needs to have in it. I know it isn’t what you wanted to hear, but that’s were I am at.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
If elected, what, if anything, what do you plan to do in order to offer the rank and file some form of medical/hospitalization insurance?
As you have already so adroitly observed the professional rodeo guys have it. I have suggested that someone in the office call them and ask them who they are using and how that was arranged. No plan that requires the membership to give up their existing coverage for something temporary is going to have a chance to succeed. This is a nut that we have to crack and I believe it is crackable. If I’m elected I intend to make it one of my major priorities.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
If elected, what, if anything, are you going to do in order to avoid being blindsided by the specter of farrier licensing? (Please note: The formulation of a "plug-in" licensing plan does not imply advocation, it implies prophylaxis.)
I talked to Randy Lukiart at AAEP about this issue. He had arranged for the AFA to be in control of the testing and certification component of licensing if the USDA made a move on the issue. He told me that when he presented this solution to the BoD he was roundly pilloried for his efforts. Frankly I think that something like that makes a lot of sense. Beyond that I agree with Rick.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
If elected, what, if anything are you going to do in order to increase membership and retain those already in the fold?
Yes. I’d work to develop better value to membership, better benefit programs, better education, and much better marketing. I’d also like to see the BoD create a member retention program that include multiple rounds of solicitation to renew. Today we only send one notice.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
If elected, will you attempt to reduce membership dues?
No. I will not advocate for this. When I&A left the AFA setting high and dry on the magazine it not only canceled its contract after the copy deadline for the Nov/Dec issue of the magazine and I&A kept all of the advertising that would have been included in the issue.
While I&A likes to shout loud and long that it was a free magazine it was not. Publication of the magazine was paid for by the advertising in the magazine and I&A kept any advertizing revenue in excess of publication costs as its contractual compensation. Because of I&A’s taking those advertisers the AFA is now having to pay for the publishing costs out of its pockets. To make things worse when I&A decided to publish its own version of the magazine it contracted with the advertisers that had been supporting the AFA to advertise in their publication instead of PFM. These advertisers are having to choose between supporting the AFA or turning their backs on the AFA and supporting I&A’s adventure. I&A claims that these advertisers have always been I&A advertisers, I’ll let you be the judge, the contract anticipated that I&A would handle the advertising on behalf of the AFA and keep the excess revenue as their compensation.
Needless to say, this is going to take a bit of time to recover from. But until the AFA is able to rebuild its advertising base it will not be in a position to look at reducing the dues and by the time it does it would likely not be an issue anyway.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
If elected, will you attempt to have the bylaws changed to allow electronic meetings?
Rick has already pointed out that the Bylaws have already anticipated and allowed for this.