Connections
Letters to the Editor are one means of connecting with each other. Going Forward invites your comments on any issue pertaining to Mensa, including topics that have not been addressed specifically in this newsletter.
I received a copy of March's Going Forward, and as usual, read it cover to cover in one sitting, figuratively speaking, at least. I'm writing now because I just don't understand what has happened to Mensa, and I'm looking for some alternative to remaining in the organization.
I joined Mensa just so I could sometimes see people in a social setting and not have to talk about football — that's the unvarnished truth. And that's really all I've ever wanted from Mensa. I don't want to teach blind children to sing or work toward world peace or find a cure for the common cold. Hell, I don't even want to wipe out poverty — I just want interesting luncheon companions. I attended one AG — the one in St. Louis about 10 years ago — and was sorta shocked to see Mensa with its clothes off and haven't been back to one. Mensans in bulk put me right off my food. But for a number of years after that, I continued to go out a couple of times a month to see people I didn't have to talk about football with, and in Alabama, that's something.
Now, even that is gone, the local group is somewhere between non-existent and invisible, and I just don't see any reason to continue with Mensa. The two or three local M's that I know agree that the organization is too rule-bound and officious to be much fun. And I'm not much interested in trying to change the thing that Mensa has become: After all, it's only a club, not a political party or a religion. I'm okay with just letting it sink under the weight of its bylaws.
I wonder if there are other Ms out there who feel the same way, and whether they/we might band together in some sort of Mensa prime organization, maybe Postmodern Mensa. Since I seldom have an original idea (I'm in Mensa on a diversity scholarship, did I mention that?), someone else must have thought of it. Can you offer any suggestions on how to contact such a group?
I'd be grateful if you'd publish this letter in GF to see whether there might be any interest in such an organization. Maybe we could call it MAnonymous.
After reading the text of Amendment 5, a number of questions came to mind. First, is this meant to address a widespread, ongoing problem, or is this an ad hoc response to a single occurrence? I suspect the latter. Second, is this a situation that threatens the well-being of the organization, or was it just a one-time inconvenience? I suspect the latter. Third, is this something so important that we need to amend our bylaws, or is this something we can work through on a case-by-case basis? Again, I suspect the latter. Fourth, do we have any legal authority to hold hearings and impose sanctions against persons who are not members of our organization? I'm not a lawyer, but I rather doubt it. Fifth, is the situation that prompted the proposed action still pending, or has it been resolved? If it is still pending, this should not affect it, since that would be an ex post facto law; if it has been resolved, it is moot.
All things considered, I think I will vote against Amendment 5. I would request that you all consider doing the same.
And what's this I've heard about the AMC's creating a new position of "Advocate"? If an advocate is one who advocates, we should ask, advocates what and for whom? This has not been made clear to me. As I understand it, this so-called advocate would travel to various venues hearing accusations made by one or more members of a group against another member or members of that group, and make some determination as to whether the charges should be heard by the Hearings Committee. Somehow the term "advocate does not seem quite to fit. In searching historical references, however, I did manage to come up with a more fitting title for the position: Witch Finder.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Mensa does have legal authority to hold hearings and impose sanctions against those who are no longer members of the society if the hearings process has been started prior to the person's resignation. The proposed amendment is simply a restating of a standing ASIE (Actions Still In Effect), one that was used to expel Frank Repp even though Repp had resigned before the AMC voted on the ASIE. There is some confusion as to whether Repp's original resignation was proper, which is the rationale about its not having been an ex post facto situation in the case of his expulsion.]
In the March 2003 GF, Marc Lederman shared the issues he had to resolve when he built a Web page about the RVC candidates in Region 2. Shortly after he posted the RVC candidates page to the Web, I saw a reference to it on one of the M-mailing lists. I was impressed by the Region 2 page and the information it offered about the candidates, and I asked the Region 3 Webmaster if he would post such a page if I built one for the Region 3 candidates.
The Webmaster agreed; I sent e-mail to both candidates and, upon receiving their replies, built a Web page parallel to the one Marc had built for Region 2. The Webmaster promptly posted it.
Marc's work was the catalyst for the Region 3 RVC Race page which has been widely publicized within the region, through mailing lists and notices in the local chapters' newsletters. I'd like to thank Marc for his efforts and for providing me the opportunity to use them as a springboard.
(I'm also now the Region 3 Webmaster, but I think it'd be pushing things to blame Marc for that!)