I have very little knowledge of the inner workings of AIDA except what is in this thread. And I do not know any of the people being discussed or their specific roles so I will not comment on any personal matters. In fact I think we should move on from blaming people for things that have happened and focus on the future, but it is always important to learn from past mistakes. These are my thoughts:
If a vote of no-confidence is raised and seconded by board members, there should be a vote as soon as possible. Statutes should exist to clearly define the process for a vote of no confidence - and any other subject. For example, what scale of vote should be required for different matters? ie voting by board members, or by national, continental, or all AIDA members? (sorry I do not know the structure well)
Any matter that is raised by any AIDA member and seconded by another AIDA member must be put forward for discussion and vote at some level.
The "top" position should not be "President" because that implies direct personal power over others. Instead there should be a Chair Person whose main job is to ensure the smooth functioning of the board, and to ensure the smooth flow of board / committee meetings.
Meetings should be held regularly (monthly?) where all matters raised by members can be discussed to form the agenda for the next meeting. Minutes should be made of all meetings and these minutes should be available for anyone to view online before the next meeting and vote. Meetings do not need to happen in specific physical locations; we have the technology to meet without making a huge carbon footprint.
On the subject of the environment, we freedivers try to portray an image of being environmental activists, yet many of us have massive carbon footprints, frequently jetting all over the world. This is a subject which needs attention as a matter of priority. If we are to save our oceans and our planet then every day every flight, every car journey, every product made and purchased must have a good reason for it, and statutes should exist to guide the organisation and its members on their environmental responsibilities. I will leave that subject for others to expand upon, but I think it needs to be at the forefront of our thoughts as we decide on the structure and statutes of the "new AIDA".
My mind has gone blank so I'll leave it there.
If a vote of no-confidence is raised and seconded by board members, there should be a vote as soon as possible. Statutes should exist to clearly define the process for a vote of no confidence - and any other subject. For example, what scale of vote should be required for different matters? ie voting by board members, or by national, continental, or all AIDA members? (sorry I do not know the structure well)
Any matter that is raised by any AIDA member and seconded by another AIDA member must be put forward for discussion and vote at some level.
The "top" position should not be "President" because that implies direct personal power over others. Instead there should be a Chair Person whose main job is to ensure the smooth functioning of the board, and to ensure the smooth flow of board / committee meetings.
Meetings should be held regularly (monthly?) where all matters raised by members can be discussed to form the agenda for the next meeting. Minutes should be made of all meetings and these minutes should be available for anyone to view online before the next meeting and vote. Meetings do not need to happen in specific physical locations; we have the technology to meet without making a huge carbon footprint.
On the subject of the environment, we freedivers try to portray an image of being environmental activists, yet many of us have massive carbon footprints, frequently jetting all over the world. This is a subject which needs attention as a matter of priority. If we are to save our oceans and our planet then every day every flight, every car journey, every product made and purchased must have a good reason for it, and statutes should exist to guide the organisation and its members on their environmental responsibilities. I will leave that subject for others to expand upon, but I think it needs to be at the forefront of our thoughts as we decide on the structure and statutes of the "new AIDA".
My mind has gone blank so I'll leave it there.