[gblake]

Originally Posted by bkahl

I think I touched upon this earlier. One of the key things the document seems to be discouraging (in my PERSONAL opinion), is the active training of new people to fill roles, especially key roles. The document seems to state that if you want a key position, or one with responsibility, you have to wait your turn.

Maybe the following is more along the lines of what Sean is looking for in this thread.

As a participant in the districts system for my third year now, I have seen new key volunteers with every event I have gone too. This is what is key to the expansion into the District Model.

In New England, we grew from 5 Regionals to 10 Districts and a District Championship, more than doubling the events. This obviously requires more volunteers. The first year was rough on the volunteers, many people going weeks in a row in their positions because no one in their area/state else knew them. Now, I have seen more referees, FTAs, Head Referees, Inspectors, and Committee members as we progress further into the system. This is pleasing, especially since many of these new volunteers are friends and peers.

Back to what i find concerning.... The document linked provides a negative shadow over exactly what I have described as one of the main reasons I think New England Districts are beginning to operate so well; a new young generation of volunteers helping to run and sustain our region. If Minnesota can open its doors to something like this, I think the region will greatly benefit from it. If they begin training this new set of volunteers now in more positions, a District Model transition will go very smooth, with enough volunteers to help run the necessary events.

I wrote that folks should be discussing how to consistently fill important roles, instead of talking about themselves.

I wrote that folks who feel they are in different camps need to flush the past, and start talking to each other (not sniping in forums).

Are you disagreeing with those two suggestions?

Blake