I'm tempted to mark this invalid, but I'm afraid people would whine about it. Here's why I will mark it invalid in a few days if no one gives a good defense --
The way I have Ohio running is as follows:
Ohio Team Contact
|--> Administrative Board ( Governs Day-to-day )
|----> City 1
|----> City 2
|----> City 3
|----> City 4
...
|----> City n
Each city has it's own "contact", and it's own events. It's all the same LoCo. LoCos should be a top-level group. This also allows us to approve a large area with shared membership, without having to deal with a city-by-city level.
The council really can't deal with approving every city. At that point, might as well handle all membership and get rid of a contact, right?
I'm tempted to mark this invalid, but I'm afraid people would whine about it. Here's why I will mark it invalid in a few days if no one gives a good defense --
The way I have Ohio running is as follows:
Ohio Team Contact
|--> Administrative Board ( Governs Day-to-day )
|----> City 1
|----> City 2
|----> City 3
|----> City 4
...
|----> City n
Each city has it's own "contact", and it's own events. It's all the same LoCo. LoCos should be a top-level group. This also allows us to approve a large area with shared membership, without having to deal with a city-by-city level.
The council really can't deal with approving every city. At that point, might as well handle all membership and get rid of a contact, right?