... an interesting and challenging exercise, Peter. <g>

>> In a million years I didn't think you would disagree with me on that point.

Life wouldn't be any fun at all if we didn't have a surprise up our sleeves now and then, would it?

>> lets break it up a little. You don't disagree that a private Club can
>> have a membership requirement which would forbid a person who sells
>> certain materials from being a member (assuming this isn't a protected
>> class)?

You just lost all the non-lawyers in the audience! <G> Which leaves you, me, Travis and Michael that I can think of. Yes, I agree that a private club COULD have such a membership prohibition. In fact, I think a truly private club could have such a prohibition even if it DID involve a protected class (that is, for the non-lawyers, one based on race, national origin, religion, sex, disability and a few other things I can't think of at the moment).

>> I'll assume you agree with that, although I got bit the
>> last time I assumed you would agree with me.

Hope I didn't draw blood! <g>

>> If we agree that is true, than why do you believe that this Club
>> doesn't have such authority? The Constitution provides that the
>> Board of Directors has the authority to create regulations for ...
>> any other appropriate purpose.

At present, I think the club doesn't have the authority to totally deny membership to sellers of slabbed chips because no such regulation has been created. Furthermore, I do not think that such a restriction would be "an appropriate purpose" for which the club could or should create a rule.

>> Whether you agree the regulation is appropriate, I assume you would
>> agree the furtherance of the hobby is an appropriate purpose to issue
>> regulations.

"Furtherance of the hobby" is a very broad term which, in and of itself, doesn't really provide the basis for any particular rule or regulation. I think it would be necessary to consider a specific proposal on its particular merits, balancing competing concerns, to determine whether the overall effect is truly in "furtherance of the hobby". It is my opinion that an attempt to prohibit membership to sellers of slabbed chips would, on balance, not be in the best interests of either the club or the hobby. Ditto banishing current members who sell slabbed chips. Therefore, I would say the constitution's grant of authority to "create regulations for ... any other appropriate purpose" would not authorize such a provision.

>> The Bylaws provide:
>> V. TERMINATION OF MEMBERSHIP
>> Any member violating the bylaws of this organization, its Constitution,
>> or its Code of Ethics, or who has been convicted of a criminal offense,
>> engaged in conduct unbecoming to a member, or engaging in conduct
>> prejudicial to the welfare of the organization, shall be subject to
>> expulsion or other disciplinary action.
>> Nothing here prevents the BOD from amending its Code of Ethics to
>> prohibit the selling of slabbed chips.

Well, you may be right that nothing specific in the constitution prevents the board from amending the Code of Ethics to prohibit the selling of slabbed chips. However, it seems to me that the Code of Ethics can only properly be addressed to matters of ethical conduct. There is nothing inherently unethical about selling slabbed chips, so I don't think it would be proper for the club to adopt an ethical provision which prohibits selling slabbed chips.

>> Nothing here prevents the BOD from passing a rule which defines the
>> terms "conduct unbecoming to a member" or "conduct prejudicial to
>> the welfare of the organization".

Once again, I concede your specific point. In general terms, I think the board can define those terms. However, I think this can also be done only in the context of an "appropriate" purpose. So, I don't think we could say, for example, that it is "conduct unbecoming of a member" to own a gun. Obviously, selling of slabbed chips would be more closely related to the club's purposes than gun ownership, but I still don't think in would be "appropriate" to define selling slabbed chips as "conduct unbecoming to a member" or "prejudicial to the welfare of the organization" (however much I think slabbed chips are detrimental to the hobby).

>> Lastly both the Constitution and By-Laws are subject to amendment.

Of course, but once again within the limitations of the appropriate purposes of the rule-making power of the club.

>> ON A DIFFERENT POINT . . .
>> NOW to combine the two most recent contoversies . . .
>> when you propose to ban the sale of slabbed chips at Club venues,
>> will this apply to Chapter meetings, events and newsletters?

And THIS is why I said you make things interesting and challenging.

I have been giving this exact point considerable thought. I'm torn between the desirability of a uniform club policy on the issue of slabbing and my belief that the chapters should have substantial autonomy in their activities.

I have not yet reached a firm conclusion on what the club should do about the issue of chapter members who are not members of the international (though I do have a few ideas germinating which I am not yet prepared to discuss in public). I suppose the answer to your exact question will depend on what we ultimately decide about the chapter issue.

Also, most chapter activities are rather informal. Unlike the convention, for most chapter meetings there is no formal auction and no formal "sales" tables. Talk about making a rule that would be difficult to define and enforce!

>> Will it make a difference at the Chapter event if the person
>> selling the slab is a Chapter Member who is not a Club member?

The answer to that will also depend on what we finally decide about chapter member status. Presumably, if the end result of that controversy is a rule which requires every chapter member to be a member of the parent club, your question would be moot, as there would be no chapter members who are not club members.

In short, I don't have a firm opinion on these issues yet. Perhaps you'll once again make a post which inadvertently points me in the right direction. <g>

----- jim o\-S