Q# 11:  Mindful that holding office is a great responsibility and not to be viewed as the outcome of a popularity contest, are we as a group choosing our officers with care?

Are we encouraging different people to hold positions to enjoy the benefits of service, in the spirit of rotation?


18 Responses

2 questions in 1.

To the first part, I don't believe we always choose officers with care.  I believe the business meeting gets "voter fatigue" towards the end of election time. It might help to either reduce the number of officers or stagger elections of different officers over the course of the year.

Within all our venues, we should all encourage only sober alcoholics to be in service.

To the second part, I do believe we encourage a healthy rotation in officer and meeting service positions.

I agree. We do not always chose with care and seem to just want to fill positions at times, but we do have rotation.

I do not know.

Is seems difficult to find members willing to take on some of these positions. Very often, there is one person who finally raises their hand.   Then we vote that person into office.   Pretty much, if one wants to do service work at e-AA, one can.

Maybe we ought to explore why so few people are willing to raise their hands and step forward? Would breaking apart some of these positions into six month rotations make the job less arduous or is that more cumbersome?

e-AA has been blessed thus far with devoted Trusted Servants. Over the three years I have been here, those elected have placed the best interests of this group, and the group's primary purpose, first in their actions.

I believe we're right in line with all that.


Part-1:  Ok, I have not been through "annual elections" in the business meeting.   I have read the concerns that others have shared. If the group is finding that often only one person steps forward for a given position, is that something that needs to be looked at? I'm not sure.   I believe that there are what I will call "guidelines" (which may not be the correct terminology) that speak to suggested sobriety, general service work required, etc.   In my ESH over my time in f2f AA most of the time as long as someone has the suggested sobriety, things usually work out. Of course my experience is in f2f meetings.

I have been involved in more than my share of f2f AA where election really is a popularity contest.   In my short time here, I have not seen this dynamic. And I am sensitive to this. . .

Perhaps a six month rotation might be something to explore.

Part-2:  So far as what I have seen.  Yes.  But my usual caveat applies.

rotation is service positions is one of the things I like about e-AA everyone gets a chance to do service

Yes, I believe we are real good about rotation.   And yes, I do believe we are careful about choosing our trusted servants.

However, considering the size of the Group, we should/could have more people available.

I do not feel as though I've been involved long enough to comment one way or the other

I am not a part of members list.  As such, I personally do not feel that I can give an informed answer.

Are we encouraging different people to enjoy the benefits of service, in the spirit of rotation? ..

and the answer is yes - often with a stick!  When all else fails we break out the rails and do the railroad thing.

Our primary problem *in my opinion* stems from the fact that the members list is quite a bit to small.   I mean - we're all experienced with business meetings being to thin in face to face - but we haven't done a very good job of letting folks know about the business meeting or service jobs. Hence our business meeting hasn't kept pace with the rest of the groups growth.

We're doing better on the rotation thing than we were.   Listkeepers can now rotate.   Dean's breaking the website up so hopefully he will be able to step back and have a breather.

Yes, and Yes. If you disagree, run for office next time and make a change. Hehehe.

Well, As I answered in another question I believe this group is a wonderful example of rotation.  Those that leave office hold their own council and let the new person learn for themselves.   Which seems to be a good way of handling recovering alcoholics.

Do we choose our officers with care?   Hmmmmm -------- I am in the position I am in by default.   I have enjoyed the work I have had so far but sometimes I think we scare people off of service work.  Things get vicious online or maybe they sound more vicious.   I have seen them get vicious in regular AA meetings but I think the "gossiping and back biting" are less evident so a little easier to swallow.   

Somehow we have to let newcomers and all of us in general know that ----- the bickering is normal to AA and that we all come back as friends and that it's sort of a process of "growing up" to be able to stick it out.  LOL

No, I am afraid I don't think we give enough care of choice NOR encouragement to those that might volunteer for service work. We really need to think about this one IMHO.

Yes, in the women's list we are.

In most cases I would say yes but again there is the length of sobriety causing folks to be unable to stand for service positions.

I haven't been involved long enough to really know, but I do think staggering elections is a wonderful idea.  It just makes sense to me.

I have never seen the election of group officers as a popularity contest, I have a hope that God has a hand in it. Additionally a group doesn't rise and fall on the basis of individuals. 

I feel people are encouraged to rotate.

Back to 2007 Inventory Summary