On Mega Society By-laws

Ronald K. Hoeflin

Reprinted from Noesis #142, October 1998

The proposal below, published two years ago, will be voted on along
with the other proposed alternatives for Mega governance. --KL

The ten pages of By-laws in Noesis 141 [reprinted as item #6 in this issue] will in my view generate more disputes than they will quell because they are too cumbersome to be followed to the letter, so that disputatious persons will tend to seize on them as a constant pretext for cries of “Foul!” or “Unfair!” or “Fraud!” I’ve seen this happen in the Triple Nine Society and before that in the ISPE. It would be simpler in such a small group as Mega to tackle each problem as it comes up: (1) someone notices a problem and proposes a solution, (2) the editor(s) publish the proposal and allow time for discussion, followed by a vote, and (3) a simple majority of those voting decides the issue. Those who manage the affairs of the Society should otherwise be given a free hand to make whatever spontaneous decisions seem rational to them, consulting with other officers or with the membership as a whole if issues come up that seem sufficiently momentous. It’s not as if the officers can throw anyone in jail or march us off to re-education camps if what we say or do displeases them. Sufficiently severe disputes can always be settled as a last resort by forming new societies and starting new journals, as has happened frequently in the super-IQ societies over the past two decades.