P.O. Box 795
Berkeley, CA
September 2, 1986
To the Triple Nine Executive Committee and others:
In response to Patrick Hill's letter of August 11:
It's good to see some activity at the local level in the
TNS. I'm particularly pleased that former members and ISPE
members are being included in the Houston group.
Local meetings give members a different and more personal
value for their membership dollar, supplementing the more formal
exchange in Vidya. I would like very much to see a network of
active local groups, but this must come from the local members.
All we can do is provide a little help. A membership register
would be very useful for this purpose. Perhaps we could call for
volunteers to work on this project. (I'd like to see Patrick
take the project on, on the basis of his Vidya Catalog, but I
realize that it's a big job and I don't know if he'd have the time.)
I have already made my position clear with regard to what
constitutes a proper vote. I agree that we must allow sufficient
time for deliberation; I think we did.
Patrick's idea of handing over part of the constitutional
responsibilities of the Executive Committee to a "commission"
doesn't appeal to me at all. Members of the Committee were
elected to exercise their individual judgement in making deci-
sions on the difficult issues which face us from time to time; I
believe that the Committee must set its own affairs in order, not
turn to someone else to smooth over ruffled feathers.
In response to Ron Hoeflin's letter of August 19:
Ron told me in a phone conversation that Scott has been on
vacation, but I'd like to know whether there's still a problem
with getting the mailing labels for Vidya in a timely manner.
There must be some kind of misunderstanding between Ron
and Bill Hoon regarding the timing of invoices, payments, and
expense documentation for Vidya. I don't see any real issue here,
but Ron is clearly upset that his expectations about the timing of
these payments are not being met.
Possibily Bill could propose a method of handling this. Surely
we should be able to work out something satisfactory to all
parties involved.
Ron's call for Bill's replacement as Treasurer is a
disproportionate response to this situation and is out of context
here, as the Executive Committee can't replace elected officers.
I have heard Barry's allegations about Bill Hoon's remarks
about the TNS in publications of the ISPE, but I've seen no
evidence and Bill denies having written anything but official
reports for Telicom. For Ron to repeat this accusation without
independent corroboration is not very responsible.
As for Barry's accusation, I'll believe it when I see a copy
of Bill's purported remarks with Bill's signature.
Ron offers a mixed bag of items as the subjects of possible
petitions to the membership. I see these items in very different
contexts:
The replacement of the members-at-large by officers with
specific duties is not merely a proposal to be voted on, nor just
a constitutional amendment, but an idea which, if adopted, would
significantly alter the structure of the TNS. I think that it is
too early for specific proposals to be written into petitions to
pass through the mechanics of amending the constitution, but this
is a matter which has implications far beyond our Committee and
I think we should share our deliberations with the membership
through the pages of Vidya and try to get some idea of what the
members want; let's ask for suggestions then take a poll.
My own preference, as I stated in my letter of August 12, is
for a small Executive Committee and a number of appointed
officers to perform the functions involved in day-to-day
operation of the society.
I don't believe that the membership has any more business
passing on the membership of a long-time member of the society
than the Executive Committee does. I believe that it would be a
violation of Anne's privacy to air this matter through Vidya.
I can't go along with offering Ron a contract, even though I
appreciate the good work he's done on Vidya and would be
pleased if he remains Editor through the end of this Executive
Committee's term of office.
The question of first or third class mailing isn't important yet,
while Vidya is still under an ounce; I'll want to see us go that
route eventually, but I won't force a confrontation with Ron
over it now.
In response to Barry Kington's letter of August 20:
I find the innuendo in the second line of Barry's first paragraph
offensive, not in keeping with the democratic tradition of the
Triple Nine Society, and injurious to the deliberations of this
Committee.
It's no crime for someone to hold a position now which
conflicts with a position formerly held, but I question the
accuracy of Barry's characterization of early opinions
regarding Anne's membership status.
In his letter of March 31 (page 2), Barry quotes me as saying
that the matter of Anne's membership status could be
scandalous if it became widely known. What I told Barry was
that this matter should not be pursued (for the reasons I have
adduced in my letters) and that the best thing would be to let
it be and avoid a scandal--which would surely harm the
society. Barry pursued the matter anyway, with the results
with which we are all, unhappily, familiar.
I do not, at this point, regard Barry as an authority on
ethical conduct, and I don't see any merit in his criticisms of
Anne, Norm, Bill, and Ron Penner, nor do I believe that the
attacks which have been made against Anne were from lofty
motives, as Barry claims.
Barry seems to have things all figured out--we'll replace
Anne with Dale Adams and Norm with Richard May, thus
removing two obstacles to Barry's empire-building.
In response to Norm Treloar's letter of August 25:
I agree with Norm that it's unfortunate that the TNS Annual
Meeting has been organized without the participation of the
Executive Committee, but it's too late to change it now, so
we'll have to live with a bad situation.
I am opposed to a written code of conduct for Executive
Committee members. You can't legislate personal ethics.
Anyone should be able to call for a vote as long as time for
debate (one month) is observed.
A further note:
Near the end of July, I asked an associate of mine to write
for information about all seven active high-I.Q. societies, which
she did on July 28. Among her letters was one to Barry Kington
regarding the Triple Nine Society.
As of this writing, she has heard from five of the societies
--but she hasn't heard anything from Barry. (The other so-far-
silent society is the Mega Society, whose metabolism is currently
very sluggish.)
I submit that it is not acceptable for the Membership Officer of
the TNS to sit on inquiries about the society for over a month.
Barry Kington should be removed as Membership Officer for
the good of the society.
Sincerely,
Kevin Langdon