Quote:
Originally Posted by AVC-Ed
Not exactly the way he put it. Bob did all the leg work, and then spent considerable time trying to convince the SGB President to do it. In his words, it was like trying to herd cats. There was considerable reluctance in having this done, at least partially because of fears of disruption of the events, but also a certain amount of not wanting to be involved in any sort of safety testing. Bob didn't say what finally got it done, but that it was a long hard process and one he didn't care to ever have to repeat.
I was reading Mike's blog over the weekend, I'm pleased to see that since Pam is no longer an elected official of the ISGB, I wonder if she would care to comment on an issue that Mike brought up several times (and I apologize in advance if this is a sore topic) previously, but I would like to see it addressed here: There's an obvious dichotomy now between what you've been saying over the past week, and the "official" ISGB stance (at least by the board of directors) over safety issues for the glass beadmaker. Pam, you've been very outspoken lately about the need for good information, but as President of the ISGB, you were very quiet about it. Which I find troublesome, especially since the Code of Regulations, section 1.3.2 says this:
http://www.isgb.org/info/Code_of_Regulations.shtml
I don't want to put you on the spot, but can you at least comment about this issue? |
Ed, I have no comment on the stance of ISGB at this time on any subject.
I was president of ISGB for one year during which time we were working on upgrading systems and putting into place certain requirements in the COR. At the time of my leaving certain members had been approached regarding work on a safety brochure. Whether any actual work has been done on the subject, I have no idea. The ISGB's missions, many of which are reflected in its current programs, include a wide variety of subject matters, all of which were worked on last year to some degree.
I'm not exatly sure what this has to do with the current discussion, but......