Section 1. There shall be a Board of Directors, the purpose of which is to set policy and guide the direction of The Society.Vector's Commentary wrote:The structure I have in mind, has Directors as decision makers and policy setters, while the Officers are executioners that take action and perform the functions. I have not made a requirement that the Officers also be Directors, because I can envision cases (e.g. instructors) where the flexibility may be a benefit. Officers are like employees in the sense that they need only to be able to carry out the function. They may not be good candidates for steering The Society in general.
The hierarchy has the Board of Directors at the top. The Chairman of the Board is one of the Directors but his role is an adminitrative one, not an authoritative one. The vote of the Chairman has no more weight than any other Director, but by pacing the meetings he may have more influence. Next come the President and Treasurer, who are peers. Below are other officers who all report to the President or to the Board of Directors.
The General Members are not "below" the Officers or Directors per se, since the Officers and Directors do not have the authority to make the General Members do anything (besides abide by the terms of service). The General Members should be considered "customers" whereas the Officers are "employees" (unpaid) and the Directors are vaguely like "shareholders".
Section 2. There shall be Officers of The Society, whose duty is to oversee the operations of The Society and carry out its laws. Officers answer directly or indirectly to the Board of Directors.
Section 3. Members of The Society who are not Officers or Directors shall be referred to as General Members. General Members do not have any direct influence on the operation of The Society.