90p Admin

Beth Bowers asked this question: Colleague Marcos DeLuna is interested in joining the group. He is not currently an honest-to-god Sage Certified Consultant, but he has supported it for 28 years and been doing it independently for 14. He is a programmer and does MD work subcontracted to other MDs (Uses their license). Super nice guy and has always been willing to help me out.

I said that I'd check with everyone but generally our membership requires certified consultant status as a way to qualify members.

No problem here. I would check the bylaws first. Did we put any restrictions in there.

It was left vague on purpose. We have multiple places where being certified is stated as being required.

I believe we have had to drop others because they lost their qualifications but were subsequently rehired by a reseller. If there is a way they qualify great, otherwise we need to change the membership rules. I am not going to vote for a one off exception.

I'm confused. Is it in the bylaws Robert or is it not? If it's on our website but it's not in the bylaws, the website should be amended, right? I think we need to defer to, or vote to change, the bylaws. I'm not as up on protocol as Robert seems to be so I defer to him on the rules.

I believe certified consultant or an employee of one is required but this is what the bylaws say: Section 1. Membership Classes. There shall be three classes of members: (i) Fellow Members; (ii) Associate Members, (iii) Honorary Members; (iv) Vendor Members. Section 2. Fellow Members. Fellow Members are those individuals who have been deemed to meet the membership requirements. Section 3. Associate Members. Associate Members are not voting members. Associates are not eligible for election as Directors or Officers, however their rights and responsibilities shall be the same as regular members. Associate Membership is open to active Sage Partners and Certified Consultants. Section 4. Honorary Members. Honorary members are former Fellow Members who no longer meet the requirements to remain Fellows but the Directors recognize their service and value to the group to be such that the group would suffer by their absence. Honorary Members are not eligible for election as Directors or Officers, however their rights and responsibilities shall be the same as regular members. The Directors may elect to waive or reduce dues for Honorary Members as they deem appropriate. Section 5. Vendor Members. Vendor Members are the only members to have access to paid promotional opportunities as determined by the Directors group.

We can probably fine tune the members for simplicity: 1. Consultant Members 2. Vendor Members 3. Publisher Members I'm not opposed to dropping Sage certified requirements but feel we should have an admission process where we either require certification or we have a member who can vouch for the skills. Needs to be an application. Perhaps reviewed by a member committee if the person applying is not a Sage CC or affiliated with an existing member (the concept of W2 employee is outdated because many consultants work as 1099 ). We need to continue to focus on adding so much value to Vendor Membership that anyone joining as a consultant member to dodge the added fee of a vendor member would not reap the promotion benefit. Question: If we were to have a private area for partners/consultants to talk Sage/business -- and left the tech areas pure tech -- would we be open to admitting end users? My primary fear here is that we don't admit end users looking to use the group as a replacement for their partner or for support. Also: Probably worthwhile to look at our fee schedule and ensure we have enough of a first year additional cost so that we don't get tire kickers who join and drop. Perhaps more for the vendor and publisher members.

I wouldn't want to see it open to end users. That would really be stepping on partners toes. ""I"" want to be the one coming here to get answers, not the end users themselves.

I agree with @ThereseLogeais - NO end users. They already get information from the 90Minds web site blogs and postings. They can also help one another at Sage City at no charge from Big Louis.... This should be a topic of discussion/decision at the annual meeting.

I sent Beth the link to apply for membership and advised she should forward it. I don't see any harm in agreeing on a policy for members in advance of our more formal meeting in February. We can ratify then.

She asked me about membership and didn't mention attending MOTM.

Beth seems to be working both sides of the candle. She sent me a note on it also. Said he is anxious to attend. Chomping at the bit to buy his ticket. Why not let him attend under the guest attendee policy for now??

From Beth... So, it's a no on Marcos, right? He's asking because he's all set to buy a ticket to San Diego.

This is the reply I sent Beth via Socialcast about 1/2 hour ago: Beth, I talked to the other admin people and I think it's more likely than not that we'll be able to allow Marcos to apply. It appears there is support for consultants (even if not certified) however there doesn't appear to be support for allowing end users into the group. What we've been talking about is clarifying our membership requirements so that we don't have to make one-off exceptions for anyone who isn't a certified consultant. For now I would forward this link to Marcos and he can apply through here. https://docs.google.com/a/s-consult.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dDc0NU5LVkY3ZDdDX3RhX3p2WVdYbEE6MQ Thanks and Happy New Year!

I don't see any opposition to lightening our membership requirements at MOTM - specifically meaning that we'd accept consultants working with Sage 100 but not end users and would not require Sage certification from those consultants. So unless someone is opposed I say yes on Marcos to attend MOTM and join as member in advance of us formalizing the rules (bylaws) of who qualifies as a member.

We didn't define what the requirements were in the bylaws. I don't have a problem with someone who isn't certified but knows their stuff being a member. So, sure.

I suggest we consider something like x % of your W2/1099 income is from consulting on Sage related products. In reality we have no way to police this except to make joining in year 1 more expensive (weed tire kickers) and perhaps also require sponsorship. I wouldn't be keen on a ""click here to join"" where we could not somehow vet the people coming in (they are recommended by a member or are certified).

FYI - here's a link where I've been keeping track up updates to the bylaws for discussion in February. https://docs.google.com/a/community.90minds.com/document/d/1-paLbsav-588YBB1cbKojtzX8PKUdn6_TtHzfTSotcU/edit?usp=sharing

We owe it to our members to give them a prompt reply on this type of thing - especially if it involves airfare/hotel reservations. Going forward we need to appoint a person who is going to be the contact. On membership that should be @RobertWood and he should handle all the inquiries and followup. So @RobertWood if you could use your judgement and rule on this one and follow through with Marcos yeah or nay.

I already did my digging on him. I'm good with Marcos.