Kevin Langdon, P.O. Box 795, Berkeley, CA 94701; June 6, 1991
To the TNS Executive Committee:
I was pleased to see Cyd's letter of June 1. We have many things before us and a short
term if the next election is on time, so we'd better get going.
I have a few comments on points in Cyd's letter.
The three rules under motions leave the timing indefinite; this could lead to problems.
Barry Kington's one month with another month if there's debate seems reasonable.
I like what Cyd is doing to expedite communication among members of the committee. This
has been proposed before but has never been implemented.
Although it is questionable whether we will be able to recover any of the missing funds,
we must, at a minimum, provide a full accounting to the membership and put in place
procedures to prevent something like this from happening again (prob-ably by bonding the
Financial Officer). I am looking forward to a report from Tim Hardy as a point of
departure for our discussion of these matters, for more general discussion of the
society's finances, and for drafting and adhering to a budget.
As I am on the Executive Committee this term, I will not be available to serve on the
Psychometrics Committee, but I'd be happy to advise the committee and to supply it with
data on my tests.
As I have stated before, I am in favor of extending an offer to all members of Minerva
(and Cincinnatus) to return to TNS. I don't think that 11 people whose scores on the PIAS
may not be as accurate as scores on the LAIT or the Mega should be an impediment; many of
the tests we accept aren't very accurate at the 99.9th percentile level, either. The
sooner this is accomplished, subject to the need to take a vote of the membership, the
better. If a merger is approved, the finances of TNS and Minerva would be merged, with
little net financial effect on TNS. Crediting Cincinnatus members for dues paid to that
defunct society would be an expense, but one of which I would be in favor. We need to heal
the rift between TNS and her daughter societies.
I also have available a mailing list, which I update continuously, with about 2,000 names
of members and former members of the 99.9+ percentile societies and others who have
qualified at this level on the LAIT. Mailing Vidya to rotating samples drawn from
this list could substantially augment our membership. Ron Hoeflin might be asked to
provide a similar list of qualifiers on the Mega Test.
The TNS Constitution is a patchwork document which has shown its ambiguity and
unworkability many times. Radical change is needed. I will have more to say about this
later. Now I just want to say that we must involve the membership in thinking about
alternatives to our present constitution as soon as possible.
I agree that getting Vidya back on schedule is important; indeed, it's a
neces-sity if we're to recover the membership we've lost over the last few years.
Kjeld Hvatum seems like a good choice for Membership Officer, based on what I've seen of
his writing and his interest in psychometrics. But I've only voted for him as Acting
Membership Officer because I don't think that any appointive officer should be thought of
as permanent. Holding onto these offices should be on good behavior; the appointee doesn't
have a claim on the office and should hold it only as long as he or she is the best person
for the job.
I'm voting for reimbursement of the Regent, along with the other officers Cyd mentioned,
but this area will become part of the budgeting process when we work it out; each officer
should have certain discretionary funds, with large items taken up by the whole board.
I certainly support giving Bill Kenney a chance to get Vidya back on schedule.
But I'm not entirely happy with his performance in the past, in three areas:
1. On-time publication is absolutely essential. I know that I have a reputation for not
getting things out in a timely manner myself, but this is irrelevant here; I am not asking
the Triple Nine Society to entrust me with editing Vidya and I have an obligation
to serve what I understand to be the best interests of the membership.
2. Officers' reports to the membership must be given priority access to Vidya.
Tim Hardy's initial statement on the missing funds was delayed on the grounds that Bill
had a backlog of material. The point here is not that officers are a privileged class but
that the members have a right to know what the Executive Committee is up to.
3. The Editor should take care not to bias elections. Barry Kington's additional statement
in the election issue was improper, in my view, though he lost anyway.
I'd also like to make Vidya a true monthly again, as soon as we can afford it. I
think that it's essential to date issues accurately, according to when they actually come
out (or perhaps to have two dates, with a nominal and an actual date listed when they
differ).