[meteorite-list] IMCA proposal (was NomCom & IMCA...)

[MexicoDoug at aol.com]

Note: I apologise in advance to list-members not interested in 
hearing more on this subject and promise in the near term this 
will be my last post on the subject.

En un mensaje con fecha 09/24/2004 7:22:11 AM Mexico Daylight Time, magellon at earthlink.net escribe:

>Doug,
IMCA supports the NomCom's guidelines.  I'm not really sure
what you are suggesting  IMCA step up and do?

D: Ken, Thank you for speaking for the organization.  I hope 
IMCA can look for opportunities to add value rather than look 
for reasons why it can't help.  I am very worried that it 
could become like some bureaucrats in my country.  This is the 
first time I have noticed a specific statement - thank you 
very much - so now it is harder to accuse IMCA as being mute 
or mum.  Could you clarify "support" as to whether it 
means "requires members" or "suggests to members"?  There is a 
world of difference and I assume you see that?  I really don't 
expect nor want IMCA to police anybody not a member, even 
though in the past you have helpfully and sometimes 
successfully pursued members and non-members alike.  Only that 
IMCA act by "disciplining" members when appropriate with a 
transparent policy, and making a helpful specific official 
statement regarding authenticity like Jeff Grossman 
demonstrated can be done (a good example of unbiased 
leadership I learned from and appreciated).  When it is so 
darned obvious that the situations time and time again call 
for a standard, whether IMCA has by laws or not is moot, it 
doesn't need bylaws to express a view.

Your analogy of viewing the list as a crowded room doesn't 
quite cover the fact that most or all of the directors are 
emailed from it and at least one expressed the personal 
opinion that IMCA ought to work on the request, and it is not 
any crowed room, it is the met-list.  So if the IMCA list, 
info email address or emails to directors is the only channel 
way the IMCA will accept requests, that's ok.  I actually have 
volunteered for IMCA, been enthusiastically accepted, and then 
sent 5 follow-up emails with still no request.  It reminded me 
of when I joined nearly a year ago, the same treatment 
happened until I posted my problem.

Since you requested, with my due respect and appreciation 
especially to you I will provide a draft proposal for public 
comment (list) and IMCA processing for rulemaking or rejection 
(emailed to you directly, so now you get it twice - sorry for 
the necessary duplication) a continuacion.  I fully understand 
that IMCA is all-volunteer organization and with that has its 
own challenges, and I applaud the directors for all paying 
their dues.

I have no stones to throw at the IMCA, you are misquoting me 
regarding the nameless depreciated meteorites I threw at the 
meteorite label-eating dog that destroys original valuable 
labels with their interesting specimen history to the 
detriment of science and collectors for commercial or 
primitive territorial impulse...that has nothing to do with 
IMCA.

MEMBER PROPOSAL FOR RULEMAKING
Submitted by Doug Dawn (IMCA #5875) on 24 September 2004 
jointly to IMCA and in a public forum with request for public 
comment and IMCA rulemaking as a salient test case.

Dear Directors, it is with pleasure and a genuine interest in 
the success of IMCA and it's "great potential" for the future, 
to invest the time to write up the present proposal asking for 
public comment, AND in parallel by a request for an IMCA 
ruling on the content.  I personally do not believe that (a) 
through (h) options below are all valid, but in trying to 
remove my bias by covering everything I have seen in the 
public meteorite forum claimed.  I respectfully submit this 
proposal to IMCA and my peers for comment and IMCA 
rulemaking.  By rulemaking I mean that IMCA adopt a specific 
organizational position on NWA nomenclature representations of 
authenticity.  It is not a request for policing as I 
understand that individual situations have their own legal 
ramifications.  While I feel the current organization 
statement "IMCA supports the NomCom guidliness" by IMCA in 
response to my inquiry on September 23, 2004 is a great 
improvement over the Miriam-Webster definition 
of "authenticity", I do however feel the IMCA can make a very 
positive impact on the amateur meteorite community education 
and commerce by ruling on the present proposal.

IMCA Proposal 001 24 September 2004
"IMCA single goal of assuring authenticity", should be amended 
by addition to the website or promulgation in the name of all 
the directors some IMCA approved version of the following:

"A few words on Authenticity, after all, it sums up the reason 
for the IMCA's existence":

Not only do IMCA members bind themselves to the dictionary 
definition of "authenticity" as a condition for membership, 
but due to the huge impact generally on collectors NWA 
material and its associated ambiguities and differing 
criteria, members are also are (required to) (strongly 
encouraged to) (ought to consider to) (shouldn't join if they 
have to be asked to) abide by the Meteoritical Society 
official names usage as described on meteoriticalsociety.org 
under the section relating to the Nomenclature Committee.

Specifically IMCA members may represent an NWA specimen under 
the real McCoy type specimen official name without further 
clarification if and only if one or more of the following 
apply:

  (a) whether it is the official Meteoritical Society name for 
a sample from the the actual voucher specimen mass, 
  (b) part of the Met Soc approved batch under that name 
visually inspected by the original Met Soc submitting 
scientist (though not as rigorously proven as the vouchered 
masses of said batch)
  (c) additional mass acquired from the original finder or 
close relatives 
  (d) additional mass acquired from the same original 
purchaser, 
   (e) additional mass acquired at the officially recorded 
location of the find, 
   (f) additional mass acquired ambiguously on the same 
bustling market town
   (g) additional mass acquired ambiguously on the same 
continent, 
   (h) additional mass acquired from another person 
(collector, businessperson, hippie, organization, estate, 
etc.) in the absense of enough history of the specimen to 
categorize it in one of the above,

(provided that in the member's opinion, (s)he is ["in the 
know"] and[or] [acting in good faith].)

Thank you for the opportunity to be heard.  I look forward to 
any actions that may be taken regarding this issue.

I hope this draft helpful.
Doug Dawn



>IMCA has been quick to respond to complaints concerning members.
>Complaints are also handled as discreetly as possible.
IMCA is not "mute."   I hope you see the pitfalls of dealing with non members in public?  Also, if someone wanted
your viewpoint, would you want them to address you directly or have them speak loudly at a third party hoping you would overhear the inquiry?  IMCA inquiries are probably easier to recognize as inquiries when directed to IMCA rather than to third parties.

>IMCA is not "hiding." Membership dues have provided a List for IMCA business, Directors can be contacted at their email addresses or questions at imca.cc  or suggestions at imca.cc  Suggestions from members continue to be encouraged. The organization is all volunteer.

>No one is paid.  Dues support a very soon to be legal entity with By-Laws, committees, etc. We agree that IMCA has incredible potential. (Note: All the directors have paid their dues as well as donate their time!)

>IMCA appreciates positive input of its members. No stones please :>)  But if you must, please throw them in IMCA's territory. (IMCA List)

>Thanks,
ken 

MexicoDoug at aol.com wrote:

>
>So from my point of view, NomCom is is doing a superb job whether it is intentional or by chance.  Congratulations ten times over to them.
>
>But what about IMCA?  Bernhard has a direct bullseye in his comment here.  This has also been my question, so maybe I'm biased, let my bias be judged.  IMCA had absolutely nothing to say during the last blow-up with Bob and Adam, although I asked them onlist to DO SOMETHING.  One consciencious IMCA director responded but only speaking his own mind.  But IMCA chose to be mum.
>
>What good is such a mute IMCA organization?  Is Ken quickly going after fakes all there is to IMCA?  O, yeah, and dues collection for collectors to finance dealer logos?  IMCA is squandering a perfect opportunity to rock the boat and prove itself fairhanded and a collector's organization concerned with authenticity.  As of now, it is doing a Clinton hiding between definitions and avoiding facing the music.
>
>And speaking of people who have recognized IMCA for what it is doing now in the past ...This is IMCA's fault...  but I see a dog out the window marking his territory by relieving himself, so I need to throw a stone at him and can't finish all my musings at the moment.
>
>Saludos, Doug