[eDebate] A2 CHIEF RE: New Events

Andy Ellis andy.edebate
Sat May 9 03:50:56 CDT 2009

Here is my point...You want revenue streams? You have to be able to nurture,
maintain, and grow them. There are other people with advanced degrees who do
this as a living. Some of them are even in the academy. If you tend to them
after everything else, not only do they risk not flowing very reliability
but they expose you to liability.

If this is a focus of the organization i applaud the move, however it is a
more reliable strategy if the process is devised and maintained by somebody
who does it as their job.

This does not mean fill the ec with technocratic business person, but having
one may not be a bad idea. Aside from being able to plan and make the kind
of deals this amendment suggests, this person could do a lot of the work to
let the ec focus on the things that caused them to run for office...If this
is developing revenue streams im sure the ed would take the help, but if it
is not its not something that you have to worry about.

There is a vast difference between a full time fundraiser, a development
director and an executive director...just as their is between a debaprtment
chair a dean and a provost....i would advise against a full time fundraiser,
but a person who makes ceda go, enables the ec to do what they are
professionaly trained to do, and builds the kind of resources darren says
are the real issues...is probably a lot better than someone who speant 2
weeks of march in wyoming stuck due to their first and second job.

Thats not a pot shot, a low blow, or some other euphamism, its a direct
indictment of your leadership and management.

PS-Any word on what i should do with the CEDA nats video. I asked you more
than a month ago where you would like me to send the DVD so you could do
something with it (like i don't know make it available to the membership as

On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Darren Elliott <delliott at kckcc.edu> wrote:

> When, in my opinion, the majority of people who run programs believe CEDA
> officers should be tied to the academy, be able to work within the academy
> to promote debate amongst those who matter (read Administrators, Tenure
> Committees, etc), and that they should probably hold advanced degrees and
> exist as both coaches and faculty of some sort, my arguments are actually
> proof positive that the CEDA President should not exist as a full time
> fundraiser.  And I would imagine such political platforms with that being
> the main strategy will continue to be non-starters.  So not a try at a cheap
> shot, just a glowing reality.
> Good luck with that PhD.
> chief
> >>> edebate-bounces at www.ndtceda.com 05/08/09 5:59 PM >>>
> Sir,
> Thank you for feeding the argument for why the CEDA President should be
> someone who makes it their full time job because we college faculty don't
> have the time to do the nonprofit type fundraising.
> Oh wait -- that was part of Andy's platform when he was running... right?
> Nice try at a cheap shot.  FAIL.
> -JM
> is outta here and off to get a PhD.
> _______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090509/246c9c79/attachment.htm 

More information about the Mailman mailing list