This is the Quality Contributions Roundup. It showcases interesting and well-written comments and posts from the period covered. If you want to get an idea of what this community is about or how we want you to participate, look no further (except the rules maybe--those might be important too).
As a reminder, you can nominate Quality Contributions by hitting the report button and selecting the "Actually A Quality Contribution!" option. Additionally, links to all of the roundups can be found in the wiki of /r/theThread which can be found here. For a list of other great community content, see here.
These are mostly chronologically ordered, but I have in some cases tried to cluster comments by topic so if there is something you are looking for (or trying to avoid), this might be helpful.
We also had the problem with the database earlier this month, so some of these comments aren't available in their original context. However I am reposting the comments themselves below; it's not a perfect solution, but in various ways it beats the alternatives I could think of. That said, if you find any errors in need of correction (misattributed comments, for example) please feel free to @ me. The number of copy/paste errors I made in the process of trying to put this together is... not small.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
@Rov_Scam's original comment:
I can't comment about your specific situation, since I don't know what kind of committee you sat on or how it was structured. But I sit on the board of directors of a nonprofit organization, and while there are no concerns about entryism right now, since I became involved we've restructured to put up guardrails against it. The bugbear of the ad hoc organization that is formed by a group of like-minded individuals is an overreliance on consensus, and the feeling of ownership among the founders. This is fine for very small, informal organizations, but if you're at the point where you want to start soliciting money from other people, you have to start thinking about making things a bit more formal.
In my case, it's a group focused on outdoor recreation. It was initially more or less a social club in a mountain town that was formed by a retired local businessman, the owner of one of the outfitters, and a friend of theirs who says he "manages money" because he doesn't think he's old enough to call himself retired. They got some seed money from some of the other outfitters in town and just sort of existed for a year or two until a younger friend of theirs came along and started organizing events on social media and growing the membership. That's how I initially got involved around 2018, at first as just a regular member. By this time the group was getting into trail construction and had an agreement with the State Park to take responsibility for trail maintenance in certain areas. The group had big dreams for what they could accomplish. It went from a recreational club that did trail maintenance to a group who wanted to make the area a "destination".
It's at this point where I can tell you how to implement the first fail-safe against entryism: Don't let anyone onto your board of directors unless there's a specific reason why they need to be on the board. The fact that someone is reasonably active on the board and has occasionally agreed to run certain functions isn't enough. I was active in the group for about 2 years before I was asked to join the board. And by active I mean I donated money and showed up at nearly every event. This is part of why I was asked to join the board, but not the whole story. The group had initially formed as a 501(c)(7) social club because the president's attorney at the time said it was less paperwork than forming a 501(c)(3). The problem is that donations to a 501(c)(7) aren't tax-deductable, and most grant money is only available to 501(c)(3)s. I was brought onto the board because I'm a lawyer and I was able to take care of this problem as well as various other legal-related issues that may arise. Of course, my role on the board encompasses the full gamut of what the club does, but that's part of it — you need people who are brought on for a specific reason, but are willing to accept the full range of associated responsibilities.
One of my first orders of business was drafting a set of bylaws. There are two general ways an organization can operate. The first is similar to a publicly-traded company, where members vote on board vacancies and other leadership positions each year. The second is one where the board controls itself, i.e. who sits on the board is determined by the board. There are reasons why a group might choose the first option, but, for small groups especially, I highly recommend the second. One potential downside to this is that active members will start to feel invested in the group but frustrated that they have no voice. Now, if someone is so active that they're showing up for almost every event and are among the first to volunteer whenever there is work to be done, then I'd offer them a board seat. But this isn't most members. A fair amount of people will volunteer a fair amount and want a say in things, but won't rearrange their lives around the organization. The solution to this is to implement committees. The board will form, say, a budget committee, and offer seats on the committee to whoever wants one. One board member will chair the committee to start, but the chair will theoretically be available to anyone who wants to take that ball and run with it. The powers and responsibilities of the committee will be strictly defined by the board, and the board reserves the right to limit membership on the committee. That way, if someone starts causing problems, the board can just remove them. This also significantly reduces the workload of the board itself, who don't have to spend meetings hashing out every detail but can think big picture. For the budget example above, instead of hashing out a budget for three hours they can leave that to the committee, and then discuss the committee's proposal at the next meeting. Or if they want to have an event, they can have an Events Committee who will do all the planning. This is good for the people and the board. Most people don't want full board responsibilities but want to be involved in a more limited way, and planning an event or leading up one project is a good way to include them and give them some real power without having to make them members. It's also good for the board in that if you want to give them certain privileges, like access to a bank account, it's easier to do that for someone with an actual title than for some random member.
This is interesting to me because I am also on the board of a local nonprofit. However, we are a neighborhood organization - not a mission-based org. The dynamics are going to be different because entryism is kinda-sorta desired on my end.
I can understand how a mission-based org wants to protect entryists from threatening the ability of the org to handle the tasks at hand. Sometimes they require specialized skillsets or networks, and access to those things must be a high priority. If they are good at maintaining a pipeline to keep around people with those skills dedicated to the mission, then they should be in good shape for years to come.
On my end...well, since my neighborhood is not an HOA, this org requires buy-in from residents to function effectively. Currently, less than 1% of residents are dues-paying members. It is safe to say that even though the neighborhood org makes statements to the city about zoning changes & attempts to oust the elected city councilor - they do not enjoy much support from the neighborhood itself. One bad round of flu could wipe out half the board due to advanced age, leaving the org little choice but to shut its doors. If the org is to survive its founding leadership, they must find a new generation interested in taking over the reigns. And the generational & demographic politics of that turnover is going to be quite interesting.
We are not in the same shape as @Rov_Scam 's org. Nowhere near. Entryists are not necessarily "barbarians at the gates" to all groups. Just specific ones.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link