Reporting Threads as Offensive

[Albervin]

.

I was the properly accredited GCM proxy for the Victoria Riders Section before the recent changes took place. When I learnt of the changes, I contacted June Weir, the newly appointed President of VRV, to ask if she/they wished me to continue in that role. I explained the position I was going to take on the question of Graham's nomination, sending her a copy of what I was going to say. She asked me to continue as their proxy since, without knowing the points I was making, they were already questioning whether Graham's nomination met the bar set in the rules for Honorary Membership. No doubt you know better, but my understanding is that, without going into the whys and wherefores, the previous officers appointed June as President, immediately before resigning. She is convening a meeting of members to elect new officers. Does that count as a coup? I am not aware of any proposal to change their rules, which require that any member should first be a member of the VOC. If such a change was agreed, I would resign as their proxy.

On a sort of related matter, you query Arthur's credentials as proxy for the NSW Section. I haven't seen anything to judge either way, but how come you, a member of that Section, were not carrying the NSW vote? Had you done so, there could have been no question of Arthur, or anybody else, usurping the section vote.

I was only given the code to connect to the ZOOM meeting on the Saturday. It was not widely advertised and it was only by luck a friend asked if I had it. There is no doubt that in the future we will not need a "foreign" proxy.
What has/is happening in Victoria is very complex and sad. The current President has expressed a desire to heal the wounds with the old section and eventually merge. In other words, back to square one.
It is my understanding that a proxy has to be appointed prior to every meeting, am I wrong in thinking this?
Alyn

 

[Vincent Brake]

I just wanted to express a couple of points after reading, watching and listening to the months of back and forth on these on going issues.

A debate is defined as follows:

"Debate is a process that involves formal discourse on a particular topic. In a debate, arguments are put forward for often opposing viewpoints. Debates have historically occurred in public meetings, academic institutions, debate halls, coffeehouses, competitions, and legislative assemblies. It is a formal type of discussion, and often includes a moderator along with an audience"

I recall from School Debates that the moment either side started with Ad Hominem / personal attacks that the debate was lost. I guess in this instance we all as a club have lost the debate as the personal attacks go back and forth.

I also wanted to express that most of the EC and people who have been involved in this debate are dare I say older members of the Club or at least older than me. I have been involved since 2013 across a couple of sections internationally and to give some context I am 44. I would ask us all to consider how this is benefiting the people who will ultimately inherit the club. Most of the younger Vincent Owners I know are active on social media. They will not use an out dated forum like the CE example. I have a large network of friends that are Vincent Owners internationally through instagram some of whom are Club members and allot that are not. If we as a club provide a substandard product what we end up with is a lack of engagement. A lack of engagement for our club means a drop in membership and we all know what the outcome will be. As a Trades lecturer if I stand in front of my classes and give boring lectures, my class attendance drops. If I provide a fun, engaging and interactive experience I have a high attendance in my class.

So the debate that sections, section organizers and the EC should be having as I see it is this. How do we update our computer software to support the needs of all club members moving forward? By all means improve the systems and update them, but don't do it at the sake of the people who will be members in the future. I would urge us all to think about how future Vincent Owners Club members will engage with each other.

CE works for the club website and shop great use it. It has a poor forum, don't use it and keep the current one. Is it really that hard?

Let us put aside the personal issues that have taken place, we cant undo whats been said. What we can do moving forward is stop, listen to each other, engage our brains, drop the ego and treat each other kindly no matter what our personal views are.

Thanks Gene.

Wise words, from a young kiddo, lets hear and listen well!!!!.

 

[Little Honda]

But as you surely know, this is a very sophisticated forum, with many advanced features. In this case, you can click on "Edit" at the bottom of your post and make the correction!

Well said, Gary!

 

[Bill Thomas]

I have also found that newer members need all the help they can get, These are strange old bikes,
Photos are worth a lot of words,
I have tried to help many via P.M., Who prefer one to one chat.
Cheers Bill.

 

[Normski]

I have also found that newer members need all the help they can get, These are strange old bikes,
Photos are worth a lot of words,
I have tried to help many via P.M., Who prefer one to one chat.
Cheers Bill.

I bought Richardson, KTB and the parts book as soon as I bought my Egli, good as they are the help and advice available on this forum has proved priceless.

 

[Albervin]

.

I was the properly accredited GCM proxy for the Victoria Riders Section before the recent changes took place. When I learnt of the changes, I contacted June Weir, the newly appointed President of VRV, to ask if she/they wished me to continue in that role. I explained the position I was going to take on the question of Graham's nomination, sending her a copy of what I was going to say. She asked me to continue as their proxy since, without knowing the points I was making, they were already questioning whether Graham's nomination met the bar set in the rules for Honorary Membership. No doubt you know better, but my understanding is that, without going into the whys and wherefores, the previous officers appointed June as President, immediately before resigning. She is convening a meeting of members to elect new officers. Does that count as a coup? I am not aware of any proposal to change their rules, which require that any member should first be a member of the VOC. If such a change was agreed, I would resign as their proxy.

On a sort of related matter, you query Arthur's credentials as proxy for the NSW Section. I haven't seen anything to judge either way, but how come you, a member of that Section, were not carrying the NSW vote? Had you done so, there could have been no question of Arthur, or anybody else, usurping the section vote.

Tim, the changes in Victoria were only made known to a very small number of people so I can only assume Martyn notified you. I am sure he will confirm that. However, that does not explain why you obtained your proxy outside of the approved dateline as set down in the VOC Rules. I am not going to quote rules here as I am sure sure you know them better than most BUT if a proxy is not approved via the VOC Secretary more than one week prior to a meeting it is invalid. That is how read the rules (not interpret them).
As far as resigning as their proxy it would be more of a case of refusing to be their proxy since a proxy has to be assigned before EVERY meeting. This is how I read the rules.
Alyn

 

[Tim Kirker]

I just wanted to express a couple of points after reading, watching and listening to the months of back and forth on these on going issues.

A debate is defined as follows:

"Debate is a process that involves formal discourse on a particular topic. In a debate, arguments are put forward for often opposing viewpoints. Debates have historically occurred in public meetings, academic institutions, debate halls, coffeehouses, competitions, and legislative assemblies. It is a formal type of discussion, and often includes a moderator along with an audience"

I recall from School Debates that the moment either side started with Ad Hominem / personal attacks that the debate was lost. I guess in this instance we all as a club have lost the debate as the personal attacks go back and forth.

I also wanted to express that most of the EC and people who have been involved in this debate are dare I say older members of the Club or at least older than me. I have been involved since 2013 across a couple of sections internationally and to give some context I am 44. I would ask us all to consider how this is benefiting the people who will ultimately inherit the club. Most of the younger Vincent Owners I know are active on social media. They will not use an out dated forum like the CE example. I have a large network of friends that are Vincent Owners internationally through instagram some of whom are Club members and a lot that are not. If we as a club provide a substandard product what we end up with is a lack of engagement. A lack of engagement for our club means a drop in membership and we all know what the outcome will be. As a Trades lecturer if I stand in front of my classes and give boring lectures, my class attendance drops. If I provide a fun, engaging and interactive experience I have a high attendance in my class.

So the debate that sections, section organizers and the EC should be having as I see it is this. How do we update our computer software to support the needs of all club members moving forward? By all means improve the systems and update them, but don't do it at the sake of the people who will be members in the future. I would urge us all to think about how future Vincent Owners Club members will engage with each other.

CE works for the club website and shop great use it. It has a poor forum, don't use it and keep the current one. Is it really that hard?

Let us put aside the personal issues that have taken place, we can't undo whats been said. What we can do moving forward is stop, listen to each other, engage our brains, drop the ego and treat each other kindly no matter what our personal views are.

Thanks Gene.

What you outline above is exactly the policy of the Club, as agreed at the March 2021 meeting of the General Committee, and confirmed at the September meeting just a couple of weeks ago. In a nut shell, get Club Express up and running, as soon as possible, but keep the old forum. I struggle to see what we are arguing about . . .

 

[Peter Holmes]

I agree with Tim wholeheartedly, if we are to retain the existing forum in exactly the same format as it is currently, what indeed are we arguing about, if only that had been categorically stated and made clear in the first instance we would have all been a lot better off.

So can we now take it that this sorry episode is now over, those of us that use and really appreciate this existing excellent forum will continue to have the benefit of using it now and into the future, it is no longer under any threat whatsoever, if we are given that assurance we can all move on.

Well almost, it still leaves the matter of the disgraceful comments that were directed towards Graham Smith, hopefully that will be dealt with fairly soon one would hope.

 

[LoneStar]

I agree with Tim wholeheartedly, if we are to retain the existing forum in exactly the same format as it is currently, what indeed are we arguing about, if only that had been categorically stated and made clear in the first instance we would have all been a lot better off.

So can we now take it that this sorry episode is now over, those of us that use and really appreciate this existing excellent forum will continue to have the benefit of using it now and into the future, it is no longer under any threat whatsoever, if we are given that assurance we can all move on.

Well almost, it still leaves the matter of the disgraceful comments that were directed towards Graham Smith, hopefully that will be dealt with fairly soon one would hope.

Exactly right. But to dispel any doubts, is there a link to meeting minutes or a similar official record to document this decision on the forum's future?

 

[Tim Kirker]

Extracted from the March General Committee Meeting minutes:-

Tim Kirker speaking on behalf of the VRV section read out the motion below:
The General Committee supports the Executive Committee in implementing the Club Express System for the running of the Club.
The General Committee also supports the maintenance of the present Club Forum until such time as any alternative facility, provided by Club Express, is demonstrated to measure up to the present forum, and a mechanism for retaining and accessing old material is available.

. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .

• The GC agreed unanimously to carry the motion read out by Tim Kirker

At September's meeting a correction was made to the effect that the vote was not unanimous with, I think, a couple of people saying they had voted against the motion, out of about twenty-five/thirty.

It was further agreed that the arbiter of whether any new forum measured up to the present forum would be the General Committee. In other words, the present forum would not be replaced without the agreement of the General Committee. That motion has not been rescinded and will be Club policy until it is - and it can be rescinded only by the General Committee.

At the September meeting the EC confirmed that, whilst the functionality of the trial forum being developed in CE is similar to the present forum, its layout and presentation is not as good.

So, the argument was won six months ago . . . Why can't we move on?

Tim Kirker