And Arthur?
- Status
The Exec also needs to acknowledge if members at the meeting acted appropriately and if they did not, then action should be taken.
The silence of the Exec just possibly tells me they think they are just good old boys and untouchable or they don’t care. There needs to be communication so we can move forward from a high voice. This debate may have started by CE and the forum but now it has turned into very considered personal attacks and that is the main problem.
You also fueled the fire with your 10 minute rant against Graham knowing there would be a backlash. Now you just want to put it away to bed. Unfortunately you cannot do that and it’s going to take a comment from a higher power to answer all the questions. Only then will we know the future of the club which will depend on the statement.
I’m also a younger member of the club and the future. I am appalled by the comments and the distaste it has left.
Over to the Exec for an official response.
Mark
The silence of the Exec just possibly tells me they think they are just good old boys and untouchable or they don’t care. There needs to be communication so we can move forward from a high voice. This debate may have started by CE and the forum but now it has turned into very considered personal attacks and that is the main problem.
You also fueled the fire with your 10 minute rant against Graham knowing there would be a backlash. Now you just want to put it away to bed. Unfortunately you cannot do that and it’s going to take a comment from a higher power to answer all the questions. Only then will we know the future of the club which will depend on the statement.
I’m also a younger member of the club and the future. I am appalled by the comments and the distaste it has left.
Over to the Exec for an official response.
Mark
And Tim, you are now using the forum to get your point across and stir things up just as you have accused Graham.
You knew what you were doing when you stood up and made your statement, you just did not expect it to be on the internet and thus the backlash has been even more than you thought.
Welcome to the modern world.
Mark
You knew what you were doing when you stood up and made your statement, you just did not expect it to be on the internet and thus the backlash has been even more than you thought.
Welcome to the modern world.
Mark
Sorry Norman. I thought you as an astronomer, would understand. QED is an abbreviation of a Latin phrase quod erat demonstrandum, which means 'that which was to be proved'. It is a well known expression in English speaking countries, and I thought most people would know it. I was using the term, somewhat tongue in cheek, to point out that, in posting your message, you were confirming the thesis I had set out in mine. You are asking the EC to repeat what has already been said, because you did not believe them first time around, or second, or third . . .
Mark
In truth, I expected the backlash to be bigger, and perhaps a bit more effective. The Club is bigger than all of us, and has seen and weathered much worse that this.
Tim Kirker
Being an astronomer has nothing to do with it and I am well aware of the use of QED in English speaking countries. It is not that I do not trust the exec. I regard some of them as friends but you will be aware that a group of people often behave in a way that they would not as individuals. Consider a mob. If the exec would put in writing that they will not interfere in any way with the present forum they could stop this nonsense at one stroke. Verbal assurances which can be argued about later do not carry the same weight as a written assurance. Would you agree to buy a house with only a verbal agreement?
I haven’t been to any VOC GCMs or AGMs for the last six years - in the previous 30 years or so I attended most of them. In that time I was usually in the opposite camp to the Exec, being against increasing the membership subscription to facilitate the constant race to increase the size of MPH, building up the Clubs’ cash balance to an unnecessary amount, buying property, getting in too deep in financing the Spares Company, the constant rush to propose new Honorary Members to the point of rivalling the House of Lords and many other issues. Occasionally I won, mostly I lost. I’ve had more arguments with Andy Everett and Tim Kirker than all the present posters on this subject put together. In true democratic style, the members at these meetings could stand up and say what they liked without being castigated for their opinion as long as they accepted the vote when everyone else had their say.
On this Forum some posters use a variety of methods to discredit people who don’t agree with what they say and using just a surname immediately shows no respect for the person’s opinion; employing tricks perfected by trolls and gutter press all over the world to undermine, misquote or exaggerate the victim’s words. Not only do the Exec members get abused but we are now moving into the actual irrelevance of the positions they hold within the VOC in this brave new world of the internet.
Alyn Vincent has recently (with a total lack of self-awareness) explained to us how to have civilized debate. I live in a Yorkshire mining area and am not fazed by the language used in Australia and the Welsh valleys where he obviously perfected his prose, but the Forum is not the place to use it.
Just to get some context, I am led to believe that about 200 VOC members (including me) use the Forum, with a couple of dozen penning most of the dissatisfaction. The other 2000 or so probably have no idea, or care about, who runs it or if it continues, so let’s not get carried away with statements such as being potentially the VOCs biggest section - a little pee in a big pond. Governments and banks all want to do away with cash as available technology has made it obsolete, it will happen, but the timing has to be right. The same applies with the VOC, in the not too distant future the membership will vote for a move online, that’s respecting democracy.
I earlier said I was worried this subject would split the VOC; I’m now starting to believe it is the intention of a few - helped along the way by others - that can’t see it coming.
Before anyone asks, I don’t think Tim Kirker was having a rant, he put forward a counter argument against Graham’s nomination as is the custom, and he lost. So it was put forward to the AGM as the majority voted, so why have we had constant bile from his supporters ever since that besmirches the image of the VOC?
Having watched the video I think Arthur Farrow was VERY calm, not ranting as claimed. His inference that Graham’s bike collection needed looking into will need proof; if he can’t provide it he should issue a formal apology.
Just a thought, why are some posters so keen for Graham to be made an Honorary Member of a Club they have no respect for?
I hope any replies will reflect what I have said, not what they think or imagine I have said.
Vince Farrell
Just a quick one on Numbers Vince,
At the bottom of the page it says , Web Site members 4,294 ?,
I am not good at these things , But I have been in the Club for over 50 years ,
So think I can have an Opinion too.
Cheers Bill.
Also as I have said before, A hell of a lot goes on , via P.M. s,
I think some people don't want to air there dirty washing in front of everybody ?.
At the bottom of the page it says , Web Site members 4,294 ?,
I am not good at these things , But I have been in the Club for over 50 years ,
So think I can have an Opinion too.
Cheers Bill.
Also as I have said before, A hell of a lot goes on , via P.M. s,
I think some people don't want to air there dirty washing in front of everybody ?.
Last edited:
I'm amazed there are so many VOC members on the Forum Bill, thanks for putting me right.
Vince Farrell
- Status