[Harp-L] Re:SPAH award nominations--who's nominated, and how is the winner chosen?

[EGS1217@xxxxxxx]

Richard:
 
While I enjoy your posts for the most part, challenging the SPAH President  
and those who are working their butts off at this very moment putting on 
what is  likely to be THE biggest SPAH EVER--since it's the 50th Anniversary  
Celebration and is now less than two weeks away, comes across  as highly 
unfair. Those of us who've attended SPAH's for years and paid any  attention at 
all know that the last weeks prior to a Convention are basically  
controlled chaos for those running it--with every volunteer (and they ARE  volunteers 
who rarely receive sufficient kudos for their work)--going without  sleep 
in order to provide the very best time for the rest of us Members. I've  seen 
these people dead on their feet during a Convention because of all the work 
 they had to do before--let alone during. Very few realize how much work 
and  total exhaustion this entails.
 
 
What you ask about has been available to the membership for umpteen years:  
the data is on your nomination forms which come in your SPAH package. When  
you receive them each year is when you can (and have a perfect right to)  
question the process, not on an open forum such as harp-l immediately prior  
to the 50th Anniversary, given that the bulk of SPAH's membership does NOT  
belong to or post on harp-l. You've been asking pointed questions here about 
how  SPAH is run for a couple of years now so I'm curious as to your timing 
and  why you'd NOW question the nomination process of AWARDS--which are a 
voluntary  recognition of someone's worth to SPAH members--given generously 
and usually out  of an emotional reaction by his/her peers--and not anything 
remotely similar to  a 'Nigerian election'. 
 
 
The recipients aren't 'running or campaigning' against others. They have no 
 idea they've been nominated...that's precisely the point! When they're 
chosen to  receive the Award by the membership (and I suspect only a relatively 
small group  of people bother writing in to nominate particular people 
given that so much of  the membership is international) - it's a huge and most 
pleasant surprise.  Frankly, with only a couple of exceptions, for the most 
part I don't think I  want those I nominate to know I did so.
 
 
Perhaps it's that you don't really know what these awards represent?   I'd 
suggest you (and any others here who have jumped onto this bandwagon) do  
some reading about Bernie Bray and Pete Pedersen. Then read the backgrounds of 
 the Award recipients over the past years.
 
 
These awards are also about US, the SPAH members--those who pay their dues  
every year and are the only ones who have a right to nominate our peers for 
 their selfless and wonderful contributions to the harmonica world, and who 
 live according to the aims of SPAH: specifically for the Preservation and  
Advancement of the Harmonica. Surprisingly, there aren't all that many 
people  who meet the criteria, or who focus on the education of future 
generations, or  who spend hours of their own time generously donating their 
expertise to teach  others without recompense, or who have done something harmonica 
related which is  particularly elevating or of note in a particular year. 
Those  nominated are people highly respected by every one of those they come 
into  contact with and who are universally admired and liked. There seems to 
be a  theme, which pleases me. Good people DO 'finish first', after all.
 
 
When we recognize them it's because of who they are and how they shine.  
When our reasons for nominating them are sent in the SPAH board HAS to weed  
through these nominations precisely because the nomination has to fit rather  
rigid and specific requirements for each particular award. In one case it's 
for  excellence during the preceding year. The reason given by the person 
doing the  nomination has to be legitimate and not merely a pat on the back 
to a friend,  and the nominator MUST be a current SPAH member. All of this 
requires a  checking process. 
 
 
In fact, this year someone I know actually sent out a request to friends to 
 be nominated for an award. I found the request unseemly and in fact  had 
already selected someone else for that particular award--and written my  
essay. I've never run into this before and felt quite uncomfortable.
 
 
Ergo, I'm one SPAH Member who NEVER wants the process to turn into an  
'electoral campaign'. That's never been what the Awards process was  about. I 
have no quarrel whatsoever with the SPAH Board querying my own  nominations 
and striking out someone they feel did not quite meet the  requirements, or 
finding my reasons for the nomination not reaching the bar set  for that 
Award, whether I thought so or not. That IS their role and  someone has to be in 
charge of it. There's nothing nefarious or 'secretive'  about this 
whatsoever. 
 
 
Because of this I'm extremely pleased to note that my own personal choice  
for the Bernie Bray award: Phil Caltabellotta was the recipient last year. 
Since  Phil took time to encourage me to play --and even at his level would 
play along  with me, was huge in my own progress. Both he and Val (another of 
my previous  nominees) are harmonica royalty in my book who've personally 
done so much not  only for me but for dozens of other players, and they 
deserve any and all  kudos sent their way. 
 
 
In prior years my choices have rarely been the recipients. I've only  been 
a SPAH member for 9 years, and don't yet know the history and background of  
all of those who are/were deserving. As I spend more years within SPAH I  
hope to learn more about those people who have earned the Awards--and  
'earned' is the appropriate term. But as I do study the backgrounds of the  
winners, there hasn't been a recipient yet who was ill-chosen, at least in my  
most humble opinion. The list of recipients is a 'who's-who' in our harmonica  
world.
 
 
Would you prefer the awards be cancelled due to all this friction?   I've 
no idea why there seems to be all this sturm und drang to fix what simply  
ain't broken about SPAH. The membership has been enjoying the Conventions for  
years. Nominations are made and Awards are given --always a lovely surprise 
 after the Banquet dinner--an honoured tradition. 
 
 
At any time during or after a SPAH the Board of Directors, the President  
and the VP, etc. can be approached about any issues or problems one may have. 
 I've always found them very receptive. As well, one can write in to SPAH  
about any issues immediately following a Convention.
 
 
It goes without saying that those who are unwilling to pay their  yearly 
dues to be SPAH members have no say in this at all, nor should they.  Being a 
paid-up SPAH member comes with a few privileges. 
 
 
To bring this particular issue up such a short time before this most  
important Convention does seem odd and your timing questionable. Just  say'n.
 
Elizabeth