Internet Center Management Nonsense

The computers in our Internet Center keep records of every site visited, but management removed the favorites list capability on those computers! What could be the logic for removing favorites list capability if Internet Explorer (IE) continues to keep the history of every site visited?

Until a few months ago, users of those four computers could add frequently-visited websites to a favorites list on each of those computers. The favorites list made it easy to return to a favorite web site during a subsequent session on the computer. Of the many sites visited in a session, the user would typically add none or very few sites to the favorites list. And the user got to decide whether a site should be added to the favorites list and thus be viewable by other users of those computers.

But IE on those computers is currently keeping a history of every site visited! The computers keep this record of all sites visited automatically, sometimes without the computer users realizing every site they visit can be known by subsequent users of that computer! The user can “Delete Browsing History” by clicking on “Tools” in the IE header bar, and I recommend all users of those computers do so. But what if the user doesn’t realize the history is being kept, doesn’t know how to delete it, or forgets to delete it?

The contrast between the favorites list capability management precipitously and wrongfully eliminated, and the current keeping of site-visitation histories on those computers is stark. The favorites lists were helpful to some users of those computers that frequently visited certain sites. No user was forced to add any sites to the favorites list, or to even look at or be aware of the favorites list. But it was available to users if they chose to use it. In contrast, the user can’t prevent IE from keeping the complete history of every site visited, except by deleting it as mentioned above. In short, the favorites list capability was a service to users of the Internet Center, while the current keeping of site-visitation histories allows subsequent users to learn all the sites previous users visited.

Once again our management seems to have its priorities mixed up. It seems obvious to me that the keeping of site-visitation histories would have to be eliminated before any case reasonably could be made to not have the favorites list capability available. And, what is also bad, the favorites list capability was eliminated without any Board of Directors deliberation open to us unit owners.

To comment about this or other unit owner association issues, please email me at rasmussen305@gmail.com or/and post on my forum at http://mstcuoa.proboards.com/

Openness of Board of Directors Deliberations

I have long been concerned that our Board of Directors has conducted some of its deliberations in ways that unlawfully keep us unit owners in the dark regarding actions our Board is contemplating until those actions are fait accompli. Examples of Board procedures that have concerned me include (a) discussing topics that should be considered in open session in executive session instead, (b) mumbling amongst themselves in volumes not much above a whisper so that unit owners attending the Board meeting can’t hear all that the Directors are saying, and (c) conducting so much of its business informally outside of regular open meetings that action the Board later takes in a regular meeting is little more than a formality.

Today I happened upon a post by a Virginia-condominium-association-law attorney that aptly addresses this issue. I urge you to click on the following link and read that post.

http://www.vahoalaw.com/association-meetings-and-proxies-board-member-emailing.html

If you have an opinion on this or any matter related to our Market Street at Town Center Condominium Unit Owners Association, I encourage you to email me rasmussen305@gmail.com or/and to post your comment on my forum at http://mstcuoa.proboards.com/

Collection of Vehicle Information by Management

In posts on this blog in February 2008, I explained why I believe that management of our Association should NOT collect information regarding vehicles unit owners park--or authorize to be parked--in garage parking spaces assigned to a unit they own.

Some proponents of collecting vehicle information suggest that vehicle information would help our Association in a situation where a vehicle in our garage has been involved in an offense, but there is no information regarding in which parking space the vehicle had been parked. With the license number and vehicle description, management could use the vehicle information on file with our Association to identify the unit owner associated with the offending vehicle. My answer to this argument is twofold. First, how often would this situation arise? I am unaware of it happening in the three and a half years I have lived here. Second, with the license number and vehicle description, the police can identify the owner of the vehicle and find out from the owner of the vehicle how it happened that that vehicle was in our garage to be involved in the incident. I don’t see how Association vehicle information would help the investigation process much.

Most unit owner resistance to registering vehicles with management seems to arise from the prospect of having to register vehicles that are parked in our assigned parking space(s) for a short time, such as a loaner car being used while a vehicle is being repaired, or the vehicle of guest here for a few days or a few hours. But I question whether there is adequate justification for management to collect information even for the vehicles that are usually parked in unit owners’ assigned parking spaces.

Beginning in 2006, our management has collected vehicle and other information from roughly three fourths of us unit owners using the “MARKET STREET AT TOWN CENTER CONDOMINIUM OWNER/RESIDENT INFORMATION FORM”. You can see that form by clicking on the following link.

http://www.marketstreetattowncenter.com/docs/OwnerResident_Info.pdf

One could raise various questions regarding that form and its use to collect information from unit owners, but I’ll leave most of those questions to be considered in other posts, perhaps by some of you who are reading this post. I just want to focus briefly on the second(??) section IV--the section captioned “VEHICLE INFORMATION”.

In my view, the Board of Directors should direct that management change the caption of that section to “GARAGE PARKING SPACE AND PASS NUMBERS”. I believe the requested vehicle information--“Make, Model, Year, Color, License Number, State”--should NOT be collected. Again, please see my February 2008 posts on this blog for my reasons why.

Whether you think that vehicle information should or shouldn’t be collected from unit owners by our management, I urge you to email your comment to me at rasmussen305@gmail.com or/and to post your comment on my forum at http://mstcuoa.proboards.com/