Is this organization just limited to alternative methods of tobacco use or are we open to other "harm reduction" or potentially beneficial uses of technologies like personal vaporizers?
ECO - Organization Charter: Administration
- Thread starter Webby
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
"Safer alternatives" falls in line with "harm reduction."
I.E. - A "Safer" cigarette would be an alternative to the traditional cigarette.
I.E. - A "Safer" cigarette would be an alternative to the traditional cigarette.
I think RIMP was showing concern for this statement being a tad grandiose. "Educating the world" has an air of moral superiority. I think "Educating the public about the real risks and potential benefits of smokeless alternatives and nicotine replacement therapies" expresses the mission without sounding preachy.
I get that, but my question is about whether or not the organization is limited to alternatives to tobacco products or not. For example, if there are health benefits discovered by the inhalation of PG vapor (it has disinfectant properties), or that other vitamins/antioxidants/medicines can be beneficially delivered by the use of a personal vaporizer... Then personal vaporizers could be used to help people who have never smoked a cigarette.
Also, once a former smoker has switched over to vaping, he/she may or may not decide to wean themselves from nicotine. Those who stop using nicotine may choose to continue vaping and want a different kind of support to the point of wanting to dissociate themselves from references to tobacco. In other words, they are no longer using an alternative to tobacco, they are using an alternative to smoking.
My only concern is that mission statements are by nature very short, Non-Profit Mission Statements It seems like we may be merging key objectives in with the simple, 2-3 sentence standard mission statement.
How about we keep working on refining the actual mission statement and break some of these ideas into key objectives? What specifically are we hoping to accomplish? I know everyone has a different slant on the key goals and that is what we should flesh out now.
- education of the general public
- promotion of new technologies
- independant testing and government approval of existing technologies
- creating a voice for the users of smoking alternative products
- etc.
Sounds good to me, Webby.
By the way, we need to pool some funds together to get this application going. One of the lawyers at lodge said he would gladly help me with what he could, but that he wasn't a tax attorney and wasn't really qualified.
Webby is right on track. We definitely need to break it down into key points then combine it into a mission statement. I like what you have above here. Cannot think of anything to add but feel it best to keep it short and sweet. I do think we should be sure to include "Consumers" either in the organizations name or mission statement so as to always imply we are a consumer advocasy group and not affiliated with manufacturers or suppliers with an agenda to protect.
Great job guys keep up the good work.
PS: Did i even get a nod for the "Best looking ECF member poll"? LOL J/K
Last edited:
The ECO is a non-profit International organisation dedicated to the education promotion and development of tobacco harm reduction and safer sources of nicotine and there use and benefits.
^^^^
Does this help in any way?
Here's a first line suggestion:
The mission of the ECO is to promote the acceptance of reduced harm alternatives to conventional cigarettes through public awareness and education.
I think it states the basic core of what we're after. Personally, I think we need to keep the terms 'reduced harm' and 'harm reduction' in the forefront, because one of the hurdles we need to conquer is getting the acceptance of the general 'harm reduction' concept, and the recognition that it is a new class of products.
The mission of the ECO is to promote the acceptance of reduced harm alternatives to conventional cigarettes through public awareness and education.
I think it states the basic core of what we're after. Personally, I think we need to keep the terms 'reduced harm' and 'harm reduction' in the forefront, because one of the hurdles we need to conquer is getting the acceptance of the general 'harm reduction' concept, and the recognition that it is a new class of products.
"Whether this group becomes a lobbying force or just a central (web based) repository for FAQs and current news items is up to the users."
- First line of the thread.
Seems like it's already been steered from campaigning organisation to a sit-back library
All this stuff already exists. What people wanted was a grouping to speak out.
- First line of the thread.
Seems like it's already been steered from campaigning organisation to a sit-back library
All this stuff already exists. What people wanted was a grouping to speak out.
Last edited:
"Whether this group becomes a lobbying force or just a central (web based) repository for FAQs and current news items is up to the users."
- First line of the thread.
Seems like it's already been steered from campaigning organisation to a sit-back library
All this stuff already exists. What people wanted was a grouping to speak out.
A lobbying force and repository are not mutually exclusive. To be successful at lobbying, we need an organized repository of information, for both our internal campaign efforts and for public awareness/education. Many folks have gotten a good start on this (Spikey, Soup, etc) but when someone needs this info for their local battle, article, etc, they have to go on a snipe hunt for it.
"Whether this group becomes a lobbying force or just a central (web based) repository for FAQs and current news items is up to the users."
- First line of the thread.
Seems like it's already been steered from campaigning organisation to a sit-back library
All this stuff already exists. What people wanted was a grouping to speak out.
That line was as close as I could come to a poke with a sharp stick. The key words are is up to the users. The intention was never to be a data vault, but it isn't going to be my soapbox either. Whatever it becomes is up to you, the users. Want it to be a front lines PAC? Do it! I'll right there with you. This site will be more than a library, more than a revolutionary front and more than a collection of member photos. Just how much more depends on user participation.
We don't have to agree on every detail, just the core values and key objectives. We can debate everything here, we just need to be a collective voice when we do all these things outside the forum. Kind of a "I can hit my sister but YOU can't hit my sister" thing.
Most journalists Google e-cigarettes and regurgitate whatever they find as their "source" Let's give them some positive fodder to consider before they rehash the FDA report or ASH propaganda for their 5:00 deadline or :60 local news spot.
That's all I was saying.
Last edited:
The mission of the (insert name here) is to inform, educate and promote the development and use of reduced harm alternatives to conventional tobacco use. It is an unbiased, non-profit (optional: "international") organization dedicated to the advocacy of its members, their rights and health.
Italics designate my changes to Webby's original. Thanks to gr8dane for reminder of reduced harm point.
Italics designate my changes to Webby's original. Thanks to gr8dane for reminder of reduced harm point.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We have our first (non-elected) officer. Jim Russo has offered to write the NPO documents and file for the group. Mr. Russo has an MBA, is a former IRS auditor and now serves as CFO for Harbor Communications.
I'll start it off - "The objectives of this organization are _______."
We have our first (non-elected) officer. Jim Russo has offered to write the NPO documents and file for the group. Mr. Russo has an MBA, is a former IRS auditor and now serves as CFO for Harbor Communications.
- The web site build out is being done now and should be live by the end of next week.
- Finalizing of key goals and objectives needed NOW. Once we have achieved a consensus of those, the organization charter can be completed.
- Once the Organization Charter is complete, we will establish a physical office, trust account, business license and accreditation.
- Officer nominations will be handled under a separate thread
- Officers will select teams to aid in the tasks at hand
- Legal council will be obtained
I'll start it off - "The objectives of this organization are _______."
- Inform and educate the general public as to the available options for tobacco alternatives and provide documentation to reputable medical and news items.
- Create a web-based community for individual users and their shared experiences with these products by testimonials, photos and multimedia clips.
- Form a collective voice for the urging of more positive political, medical and legal representation of the electronic cigarettes and tobacco alternative community in congress, the medical community and the media.
Last edited:
I see nothing in the charter, or mission, concerning consumer protection. Nothing with an intention to regulate the pv's sale. No self-policing mechanism, so to speak, that demonstrates a concern about the sale to minors, rank products, shoddy customer service, bogus claims. If this isn't included it just becomes a bunch of self-interested wogs banding together to get what they want. You wanna ratchet up the conversation and debate a bit, impress your constituents with the intent and ability to self-regulate and "police" the market.
Couldn't agree more - (and I certainly don't want to be a ....) How about rewording all that and submitting it as number 4 and 5? IMHO, I think the ECF handles playing "Better Business Bureau" better and keeping suppliers honest than we could (via the sheer volume of daily posts), but I definitely agree with the minors comment and after all, I'm just one voice in this process.
Personally, I just thank you for speaking up.
Anyone else? Bueller...Bueller...anyone?
thanks webby! in truth, i don't know what a ... is, but it can't be all bad. the following gives some idea of what i'm getting at:
4. To assist in efforts that prevent the sale of personal vaporizer and supplies to minors by advocating that manufacturers and suppliers utilize stringent disclaimers on packaging, on websites and at any commercial enterprise selling such products, request that purchases be conducted using appropriate identification and to report those who sell to minors to the proper authorities.
5. To act as a clearing house for consumer protection when products and services do not adhere to ethical practices that demonstrate the consumer’s best interest and well-being when manufacturing and marketing pv’s and supplies to the general public. (Whatever the organization name is) will establish guidelines that manufacturers and suppliers, at their choosing, may adhere to and who will be provided with an officially, rated approval of said practices that will be made public.
hopes this moves the issue along. cheers.
4. To assist in efforts that prevent the sale of personal vaporizer and supplies to minors by advocating that manufacturers and suppliers utilize stringent disclaimers on packaging, on websites and at any commercial enterprise selling such products, request that purchases be conducted using appropriate identification and to report those who sell to minors to the proper authorities.
5. To act as a clearing house for consumer protection when products and services do not adhere to ethical practices that demonstrate the consumer’s best interest and well-being when manufacturing and marketing pv’s and supplies to the general public. (Whatever the organization name is) will establish guidelines that manufacturers and suppliers, at their choosing, may adhere to and who will be provided with an officially, rated approval of said practices that will be made public.
hopes this moves the issue along. cheers.
dperino,
In a way we was already going to be advocating Consumer Protection by being all for the testing of the eliquids and prefilled carts. Not only is that good for us being the consumers, but it will also combat the current trend of public opinion.
But I do like the wording so far.
In a way we was already going to be advocating Consumer Protection by being all for the testing of the eliquids and prefilled carts. Not only is that good for us being the consumers, but it will also combat the current trend of public opinion.
But I do like the wording so far.
I nominate the members of the Alliance of Electronic Smokers to board the ECO. What say you?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
