Posted by Admiral Joe P (Election Coordinator) in Question for the Candidates - About Questions

Posted by Sage Pennington in Question for the Candidates - About Questions

Posted by Admiral Joe P (Election Coordinator) in Question for the Candidates - About Questions
This question is for any candidate who chooses to answer.

I was in a conversation with someone discussing the election yesterday, and at one point my interlocutor expressed the following sentiment:

If only questions mattered other than to piss off the candidates…

1. Do you agree with this sentiment? Why or why not?
2. If you were in a conversation with someone and they said something like this, how would you react?
3. Do you think this sentiment is indicative of a larger problem with our club? If yes, what is the problem and what (if anything) would you do to solve it? If not, why not?

Joe

1. That’s an intriguing sentiment. I don’t feel I agree with it, at least not the way it’s said there. I can only speak for myself as a candidate, but I welcome as many questions as I can get. The more people engage with the process, the better off we all are. And even if someone did ask a question just to get under one or more candidates’ skin, others might still find the answers valuable. Which makes it all worth it to me.

Ok.

1. In a conversation, I think I would find it disheartening. That this is the way someone sees a vital piece of our electoral process, is saddening. But it’s a place we can come back from, build faith in the system.

How do you propose to do that (if it’s a long complex thing you have planned for another post, I’ll accept that as an answer for now)?

I do plan to make a post about it, but no harm in addressing it twice. In brief, to be expanded in a forthcoming post, it’s not something that can be completed in eight months but a good start can be made. The process isn’t complicated. My idea from point 3. takes the form of encouraging members to engage with Command informally through open sessions conducted for a week or so after reports are submitted, and by bringing their ideas up to people in command positions will gradually demystify and open up command spaces. But it will take time. As this relates to elections, the more people understand command beyond being a bunch of people in charge, the more likely they are to get involved and ask provocative questions.

1. I see two problems within that statement. First, a feeling of disenfranchisement. Second, a lack of reason to engage. I want to lower the bar to entry in command, by setting aside space for people who don’t hold any government positions to put their thoughts and ideas out into command where they can be workshopped into complete proposals. Encouraging engagement, without needing to learn the ins and outs of command culture and all the bylaws might diminish or eliminate that appearance of a ruling elite, and emphasize that any contribution matters.

-Fleet Captain Sage Pennington

That’s interesting. I have heard similar suggestions before, and even had a similar one that I didn’t end up pitching. But, I want to hook onto that last bit you wrote here. If I told you that the person who uttered the original quote is someone who would appear to be part of “a ruling elite”, would that change any part of your answer?

Joe

Perhaps. I can’t say much to the notion of new information. All of us who have served at different levels of command can feel that tension of being part of a perceived ingroup. Some are disillusioned by the dissonance between the appearance and the reality. Others are just tired. Ultimately, to me, I don’t know if it matters who said it to you. It’s not the first time something like that has been said nor is it likely to be the last. What matters now is changing the culture so these things don’t get said so much.

-Fleet Captain Sage Pennington