The Constitutional amendment I proposed for the league was defeated. I’m not surprised. The membership refuses to look into the mirror.

Proposed Amendment: To be added to “Article VIII: Annual
General Meeting”, “e. Election of officers and members of the
Executive “:

For each nominated candidate seeking a position on the
Softball Leinster committee, a “confidence vote” on the
nominee is required to be passed by the membership.

Rationale for this amendment: The 2023 AGM demonstrated that
an ad-hoc confidence vote can be brought against a legitimate
nominee who is willing to publicly state truths and show integrity,
and thus be rejected by a membership desiring obfuscation,
misinformation, dishonesty, inaction, and a steadfast dedication to
the status quo. This amendment would enshrine in the constitution
the opportunity to the membership to reject any nominee at the
AGM who does not meet their oddball and ridiculous desires.

What does this rejection mean?

Everything in the amendment’s rationale was correct: in 2023, an unopposed nominee for committee chair was rejected because they tenaciously sought and exposed the truth, and who was unafraid to publicly state the truth. In light of this, the membership decided, at the AGM in 2023, to explicitly pick on this unopposed nominee for the chair of the league committee, and hold a ridiculous “confidence vote” to prevent their election to committee chair. The membership demonstrated, with their discriminatory ad-hoc “confidence vote”, a desire to have a committee who would continue the previous administrators’ patterns of inaction, dishonesty, misinformation, and lack of transparency, and that they would prefer no one, rather than anyone who might upset the status quo.

This “confidence vote” was a horrible, despicable action, by incompetent, lazy people. And the entire membership present at that AGM in 2023 were complicit in their willing participation.

This amendment would have guaranteed the membership would be able to continue their past discriminatory and bullying behavior; but in their typical childish and pathetic manner, they rejected it, not wanting to face what they had done.

They’re unwilling to have themselves held to the same scrutiny to which they hold others. “Confidence votes for thee, but none for me.” As long as you’re part of the clique that’s OK; but if you’re not, we’ll wave some magic wands and make you disappear. But we won’t admit any of this openly, and will just continue to pretend our ugliness doesn’t exist, and “make shit up” as necessary to do as we wish.

Hypocrisy. Anyone who supported this discriminatory action, and who denied this amendment, is a hypocrite.

And to anyone who might say this amendment is “disrespectful to the membership”: you are not only a hypocrite, but you’ve exposed yourself as shallow and small. Look into that mirror, it’s not so pretty. If you are not willing to hold all nominees to the same standard, but only wish to be able to reject those you dislike, that makes you a shitty person, and a lazy tyrant.

Are you a shitty person? Are you afraid of looking in that mirror?