| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 506.1 | But it's ambiguous | BUBBLY::LEIGH | DCU: I'm voting for REAL CHOICES | Sun Mar 22 1992 07:42 | 10 |
| re .0
I've sent mail to Ray pointing out that this memo could be interpreted
as a request from Ray for volunteers to remove _all_ flyers --
Qualified Board ones _and_ other candidates' ones.
I'm going to keep a careful eye on the REAL CHOICES flyers in my
facility. I didn't authorize Ray or his volunteers to take them down.
Bob
|
| 506.2 | re .1 | RGB::SEILER | Larry Seiler | Sun Mar 22 1992 09:00 | 16 |
| Hopefully the context of Ray's statement will be clear -- Ray refers to
specifically to problems with the "qualified board" flier and says that
they have stopped distribution of *this* flier -- and only then asks
people to remove fliers. Still, you never can tell what people might
read into words -- I have also had experience with people reading more
into what I say that I had intended.
But given the many reports of "real choices" fliers disappearing prior
to Ray's recent message, it is certainly a good idea to be watch for
whether it keeps on happening -- if it does, that is important but may
be unrelated to Ray's most recent message.
Let's all keep working to make this as clean a campaign as possible.
Enjoy,
Larry
|
| 506.3 | | SSDEVO::EGGERS | Anybody can fly with an engine. | Sun Mar 22 1992 13:04 | 7 |
| The REAL CHOICES literature sometimes disappears without "opposition"
help. On Friday afternoon, all the tents disappeared from the CXO1
cafeteria. When I checked into why, it turned out the contract
cleaning people had a standing order to clean out everything every
Friday. I wasn't happy, the the disappearnce was certainly benign.
Now, should I make new 200 new tents (ugh!) for Monday?
|
| 506.4 | | INDUCE::SHERMAN | ECADSR::Sherman DTN 223-3326 | Sun Mar 22 1992 21:32 | 5 |
| Personally, I appreciate Ray's memo. I am hopeful that all candidates
and volunteers will work for a "clean" election. These are tremendously
important decisions that shareholders are making.
Steve
|
| 506.5 | | SSDEVO::EGGERS | Anybody can fly with an engine. | Sun Mar 22 1992 21:52 | 3 |
| Yes, I appreciate it, too. I would have appreciated it more eight days
earlier. Then we could have avoided many incidents and complaints to
Ron Glover.
|
| 506.6 | Ron can help with the other problems | GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ | I'm voting for REAL CHOICE candidates next week | Sun Mar 22 1992 22:56 | 20 |
|
RE: .0
Might I offer some advice if you do decide to re-issue this flyer?
A call to Ron Glover concerning Digital's Policies and Procedures would
be most enlightening. It was the very first call I made before the
Special Meeting petition drive. He was very helpful and was very clear
on what was allowed and what was not allowed. Handing out flyers at
entrances and exits, as you instructed volunteers, was explicitly
disallowed. You might also ask him about placing flyers in mail slots
and in other work areas.
Might I also suggest, in the best interest of DCU-DEC relations, that
you also not utilize DCU employees to recruit volunteers for your
efforts? It needlessly places them in a very uncomfortable position.
It also is in violation of DCU's Election Guidelines. Surely you can
get volunteers through normal channels.
Doing all this according to established policies and guidelines is just
so much easier and 'the right thing' to do.
|
| 506.7 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Mon Mar 23 1992 09:49 | 11 |
|
Re: .0
> ... We now need to let the members decide how to vote, ...
Interesting. Was there no need before? Is this perhaps very subtle
evidence of the current BoD attitude that not just anyone could/should
run the the DCU?
Steve
|
| 506.8 | I like these two statements in conjunction | EOS::ARMSTRONG | | Mon Mar 23 1992 09:55 | 6 |
| "We now need to let the members decide how to vote, ..."
unless we decide they may make the wrong decision, so
"We are considering issuing a new flier and will send these
out as soon as possible if we decide to move ahead with them."
|
| 506.9 | Where is his WHY? | XCUSME::LEVY | | Mon Mar 23 1992 12:58 | 11 |
| Ray didn't seem to think it necessary to indicate to his workers
WHY the fliers are being recalled.
He must be in the mode of "do this" "do that" "don't ask" "just do".
No explanation other than letting the members now decide, as if
they'd had enough guidance from above for one day.
Is he too embarrassed to admit that the flier broke DEC's P&P, or
does he not think it important? Would you vote for this man?
|
| 506.10 | An indication of the future? | PLOUGH::KINZELMAN | Paul Kinzelman | Mon Mar 23 1992 13:21 | 3 |
| Gee, if he's that concerned about keeping seemingly innocuous information
from folks that agree with him, I wonder how communicative he would be on
the board?
|
| 506.11 | | CSC32::J_OPPELT | I like it this way. | Mon Mar 23 1992 13:45 | 4 |
| re .3
It looks like these things need to be collected for safety's
sake every Friday afternoon. (Maybe every afternoon period.)
|
| 506.12 | | CSC32::S_MAUFE | society needs a cat proof keyboard. | Mon Mar 23 1992 15:50 | 9 |
|
The CXO3 canteen has the new "Qualified cnadidates" flyer, minus the
persons name who didn't want to be on.
Tom's flyers are still there. When putting them out I explained to the
cleaning person that thery'd be there for two weeks, so I guess she
didn't hit them last Friday 8-)
Simon
|