Back to 2004 Inventory Index

Question 9: Mindful that holding office is a great responsibility
not to be viewed as the outcome of a popularity contest, are we choosing
our officers with care?


21 responses. 8 positive. 7 references to need for greater pool of available candidates, 2 to the technical nature of service. 3 respondents had not participated in an election.


Yes, but then please let them do their jobs. Every decision to be made
does not need to be made by the entire group. Let's delegate a little
responsibility here and not have every item discussed at great detail on
the member's list. We elect trusted servants to do a job. Let's let them
do their job.

Let's hope so...

We have some good hard workers here.


I think so



It seems so.

Sadly, because we're an online group, most the key posts require special
technical knowledge. That limits the number of people who are able to
serve. This, and the time some of the service positions require, make
service to this group a very real commitment.

Not always. It's difficult to choose officers with care when nobody else
wants the job. We also allow money or technology to get in the way of
some jobs. For example, if someone wants to be listkeeper the group
should consider fully sponsoring that position, even if it means meeting
some or all of the costs of the necessary online tools, email address or
whatever the group requires for them to do so. By failing to do this,
some of the group's positions are restricted to those who have the
ability to pay or otherwise acquire the tools. This is not healthy for
them, not healthy for the person willing to do the job, and not healthy
for the group as a whole.

It would be a good thing to replace all of us!:-) Rotation is good not
only for the group, but for the members who serve. Unfortunately, I
doubt that there will be enough folks stepping forward to fill
everything, and we'll end up with folks serving to long, in to many
roles yet again. I put my name up for any and everything. We as a group
have a job to do, and these little service positions are sort of
important to doing that. We are a large enough group here to never have
to have any one serve more than once in a row. It's to bad folks like me
end up doing job after job. The rewards of service are very great, and
if you haven't served the e-AA group you're robbing yourself. Something
I've noticed on line - the more contentious outspoken folks often end up
in service. This is quite different than face to face AA.

When we have choices. Often not many make themselves available.

It seems to me that there's little to be done about this. The members
choose from those who volunteer or are nominated. At the same time, I
think those who are in service here do a wonderful job.

No. But that's because we often don't have a choice. (That not many
people want to do service, because they're busy with "me me me I I I" is
fairly typical AA-wide. )

Everybody seems more than qualified to serve in the officers positions.
It's just a matter of getting them wanting to serve.

Willingness to serve is a better question...are people willing to serve
and give-back or just go along for the ride? I see people that are
members and very vocal about "what we should do"...who don't serve!
Perhaps more "invitations" to serve would help? It will be interesting
to see how many folks make themselves available for the new positions
for this upcoming e-AA election.

Need an alt Sec.

No, we pick them with expediency.

I'm not sure. Ive not been there for an election before.

still did not participate on elections

Don't know yet. This will be my first election.

Back to 2004 Inventory Indexx