rollerpigeon
Site Moderator
401 posts
Nov 09, 2005
6:52 PM
|
Hey Cliff, I hope I am not revealing too much, but I wanted others to know that I really enjoyed our talk on the phone this evening. I think I see your line of questioning on some other posts and why you desire to collect more information from those that might be able to shed some light on the concerns you and some others have regarding the world cup.
I appreciated that you listened to my point of view as I did yours. It is now my impression after our conversation that you have the best intentions of the world cup and the roller hobby in mind. I don't envy the position you are getting into though. LOL
I hope you are able to get to the bottom of your concerns and can provide this site with your conclusions and suggestions for solutions in an article that we can post for informational purposes.
In any event, I am glad we were able to work through our differences. I know the board is better for it.
----------
FLY ON! Tony Chavarria
|
motherlodelofts
462 posts
Nov 10, 2005
1:14 AM
|
Tony Cliff is a hell of a nice guy and I enjoyed meeting him in Colorado this year.
But you might want to be careful here that you aren't putting yourself in an awkward postition here , as you know, just because it is written doesn't make it true , and he is treading on some touchy ground that holds little water and of things that he knows little about.
Scott
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
561 posts
Nov 10, 2005
3:52 AM
|
Scott.You said: just because it is written doesn't make it true , and he is treading on some touchy ground that holds little water
First don't get me wrong and I am not going to be discussing much about the W/C because I am really trying to learn what I can before the next fly.
However what you said above makes a Red Flag fly up for me.Am I not understanding what you said or is there reason to believe that there is some things that are questionable with the way the W/C is being run? Why would it be touchy ground? David
|
motherlodelofts
463 posts
Nov 10, 2005
7:28 AM
|
Slamming this premier fly in publc and the people that makes it happen year in and year out Dave gets real "touchy" Dave , and by whom Dave ? some guy that just started flying birds last year Dave and has had absoulutly no experiance with this fly in any way shape or form.
Dave that "should" be your red flag , the W/C is structured by rules and bylaws that must be followed , it isn't a bunch of yahoos sitting on the front porch trying to figure out how to do things.
It is a fly that is "hugely" successful and is the premier fly of the world , there is "nothing" that can match it, so yes Dave trying to undermine this fly in public can get extreamly touchy.
Scott
Last Edited by motherlodelofts on Nov 10, 2005 8:37 AM
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
563 posts
Nov 10, 2005
9:10 AM
|
Scott.I have not seen anyone "SLAM" the WC . Everyone here in Region 1C thinks the WC is a great idea and we have nothing but respect for the men who volunteer their time to see that the fly happens.We are starting to get excited about the upcoming W/C Fly.Well several of us anyway.LOL.
I have seen posts that indicate to me there are some problems in respect to the e-mail WC committee discussion list. But that is no fault of the volunteers but a fault of the system. RIGHT?
I was very disappointed to learn that now no RD can forward any WC committee post to any of the flyers he represents.Our region being New and also a New RD how are we suppose to communicate? Can you help us understand why that was deemed necessary? How are we suppose to learn? David
|
nicksiders
288 posts
Nov 10, 2005
10:29 AM
|
Rules are the rules and if you want them changed become a representive thru the due process and then work to change them. To stand on the sidelines and shout your objections is harmful............like parents at a little league game. If you don't like the way the team is being coached; become a coach.
In the meantime throw your birds up on fly day at the scheduled time and don't go public in a public site with criticism. Don't judge the judge.
Don't be a "whisperer".
|
Ballrollers
167 posts
Nov 10, 2005
12:30 PM
|
Tony and all,
Yes, I too enjoyed talking with you about the many complex aspects of our hobby and the unusual dynamics of communicating on web lists. It is so true that the conversations on the lists fall way short of communicating the personalities of the individuals posting them. Don't worry about revealing me, Tony. I have nothing to hide, nothing that can't be revealed. I appreciate the compliments, gentlemen. I assure you, my intentions are honorable.
Dave, Good post. What is so "touchy" about checking into the communication system and assuring that all the regions and RDs are accounted for before conducting sessions and passing rule changes? Whether or not the bylaws that Scott mentioned are adequate and being utilized effectively is precisely the point of this inquiry. Talk about "touchy", would it surprise you, Dave, to know that one of the WC committee members on this list, who I will not name at this time, reported back to the WC Committee (Ron Duncan) that posts of the WC committee communications were available to the flyers on the lists, and that Ron sent a post to all the RDs stating if anyone is caught leaking this that they will be removed from the email committee list?! It sure shocked the h#%&* outta me! What's with all this secrecy? Are they running a Gestapo or a fly committee?! What's going on that cannot be revealed to every flyer in the country if need be? What communications have to be kept secret from the hobby? Please correct me if I am wrong, Scott or Kevin. I am not attacking anyone, hence I left out the names, but I am questioning this business. This stuff is supposed to be fun, guys. Why the heavy hand?! YITS Cliff
Last Edited by Ballrollers on Nov 10, 2005 12:37 PM
|
highroller
85 posts
Nov 10, 2005
1:31 PM
|
I have not flown in the W/C but please allow me to put my 2 pennies worth in.
I can understand the committee not wanting ALL of their communications made public. If there is a "public meeting" type discussion happening, making decisions that affect the W/C then by all means publish it for anyone interested. However, private communication among committee members is not always intended for the public ear. I would not like to live my life knowing that anything and everything I ever said in private concerning anyone or any subject was suddenly made public record. An honorable goal is to never say anything about anyone or any subject that you would not want made public, but I confess to falling short at times as I'm sure we all do.
An inspired man once said brothers, whatever things are true, noble, lovely, of good report, virtuous, or praiseworthy, think on these things.
Still good advice today.
Dan
|
dave
37 posts
Nov 10, 2005
1:45 PM
|
There are things that everyone should know and things that should be kept secret. Why do you think the government keeps things away from the public? Think of the chaos that could follow. Remember Y2K? It also reminds me of a game I play with my students to see how well they listen and repeat things. You start off with a sentence and when it reaches the last student the sentence has a totally different meaning. It might even be a totally new sentence, lol.
|
Ballrollers
168 posts
Nov 10, 2005
2:30 PM
|
Nicksiders,
Oh, I'll be there, don't worry about that! What rules are you talking about that need changing? Take my RD, for example. He argued with me and said that no rule change had been made; that they were the same as they had been for 10 years...said I was crazy! (He's a good friend). If the judge gets to your loft and you do something against the rules, but you did not know they were against the rules cause they weren't against the rules last year, and your RD didn't know anything about the rule chages, would you be upset that nobody told you they had changed? Think you would care just a little bit that you were not told? You wouldn't care would you? Maybe I shouldn't either. Thanks for your opinion. YITS Cliff
|
motherlodelofts
465 posts
Nov 10, 2005
3:35 PM
|
Dave the reasons that posts or parts of posts cannot be forwarded is simple .
There are many issues that come before the committee , from region splits to particular situations that arise in regions that have to before us to be decided.
One small example is that one region had paid for 28 kits but claimed 2 qaulifiers where a min a 30 is needed , they wanted to come back and pay for two more long after the deadline , our decission knocked out someone that thought that they qaulified ,it didn't make us real popular of coarse but it was what was best for the W/C on the whole.
We also deal with situations such as other countries comeing in and new regions being formed , we must look at logistics and financial.
And we must make decisions that some do not like , what is to easy to do is put people in a bad spot or loosing the context of the entire issue by forwarding only particlar posts out, a good example here is why do you think that Cliff targeted me with these accusations , why do you think he was questioning me about my loyaltys as far as the NBRC.
Another example Dave is one of the members using profanity towards another member, he was warned , and then he was kicked off.
What did you read here Dave ? you read that he was intimidating other members, not true , it was this member and one other member going back and forth at each other , only one got way to far out of line , you also didn't here from Cliff here that the member was banned for going over the line.
Dave "all" information can be passed along at any point and time, but not actual posts from members, this is to keep the context of what is going on in tact and to keep committeee members from being hacked for making hard choices or for thier opinions on an issue, our job is two-fold , one is to take care of the fliers and the other is to make decissions for the good of the W/C on a whole.
It was obvious that someone was passing posts around to push an agenda which is against the rules of the committee list , I took this to the committee and these threads were looked at and then the warning went out that whoever was doing such would be banned , the committee must feel free to debate ,vote and to make hard choices that go with the job without being persecuted on a personal level outside of the committeee list.
Dave that region that you guys are in was newly formed and you guys should be excited as a whole new world is opened up to you guys , what is sad is that someone is working so hard to dim that light of excitement for so many new and potential fliers that are on this list , those of us that are flying this fly and have been around it are just shaking are heads here, he didn't just stop here at the W/C either , he also made mention and accusations of the NBRC doing the same , this from someone that just flew his first kit in his first fly , pretty strange behaviour to say the least.
Scott
Last Edited by motherlodelofts on Nov 10, 2005 6:49 PM
|
Ballrollers
170 posts
Nov 10, 2005
3:54 PM
|
Solid points, Scott on this issue, no doubt. Thank you for sharing. This is exactly what I have been asking for from the very first post on this thread; the real scoop from your perspective.. However, these WC committee discussions are not issues that involve national security, or whether marriage is between a man and a woman, or something that might cause WW III. These are issues that concern a pigeon contest, nothing more. But by the way some folks are defending the WC Committee's right to complete privacy, I guess I could be mistaken. What accusations did you misinterpret that I made against the NBRC, Scott? I referenced your comment about the NBRC, "Who need them" at one point. I don't recall making any other. And guys, please don't let this discussion dim any enthusiasm for participating in the WC. That is not the intent, here. It has not done so for me!YITS Cliff
Last Edited by Ballrollers on Nov 10, 2005 3:56 PM
|
motherlodelofts
466 posts
Nov 10, 2005
4:49 PM
|
Cliff lets get the context correct on what I answered when you asked me this question
Why do you think the NBRC did not approve a single WC change?
(THE W/C IS NOT THE NBRC , WHO CARES)
Not sure how you got "who needs them" (the NBRC) out of this. Plus "did not approve of a single change ? "
Cliff there was only one change to the rules (two years ago) and that was to the time-in rule that the NBRC didnt even go back to when they made changes last Spring.
( to those that don't know the NBRC flew by W/C rules prior to this year)
Just to refresh your memory of what you wrote
(Sorry, I didn't mean to take it personal, but I see you post negative things about the NBRC from time to time and I am trying to get a feel for your true position.)
And yes there was a post were you made mention of the NBRC and those that run it in the same context as us on the W/C committee.
Scott
Last Edited by motherlodelofts on Nov 10, 2005 10:55 PM
|
knaylor
29 posts
Nov 10, 2005
5:50 PM
|
Cliff, the committee list was created that way. Why to stop the BS that has been going on this site. You said that you kept names out but you had no problem saying what Ron posted. Why dont you say who it is that showed you the emails or offered to show you the email if proof was needed. It is funny that the W/C committee has been fine and now that a few things didn't go the way some RD's liked it is now all messed up and in trouble. I read a post that asked why you havent seen what you could do help help the W/C? Instead of bashing it. Honestly if you knew what you were talking about and had honest questions that would be fine. All that I have seen is acusations on your part. It still is amazing that you are pointing out problems with something and trying to change something you have not even participated in. Kevin
|
LONGS ROLLER LOFT
19 posts
Nov 10, 2005
6:01 PM
|
maybe this will shed a little light on the subject. I am the President of our local union. I send e-mails to stewards, Secretary, treasurer, trustees, all are either elected or appointed. All e-mail sent back and forth between officers of the union are confidential and are not to be reported to the members. Not because were trying to hide any thing. And not because were trying to keep a big secret. It's because things that are said between officers in house and are not repeated in part, or in whole, or out of context. bits and pieces Can easily cause members to become upset because they do not know the entire context. They may not understand the financials, conditions, or both sides of the story. some discussions between officers may go on for weeks. And if one part of the discussion is leaked. The whole situation could be taken 180 degrees out of context. Believe me we have had this happen. I know of no company that lets management's memo's or correspondence out to its employees or the public. And we have to admit the ones that have been put in charge of the World Cup Have to manage. No company ,no union, and no World Cup could handle all the crap that would start. If all in-house memo's and correspondence were made public. That's why they call them in-house.It's just good business sense.
----------
yours in the sport Rick
|
motherlodelofts
468 posts
Nov 10, 2005
6:45 PM
|
Exactly Rick , Thank you for a clear example.
Scott Campbell
|
LONGS ROLLER LOFT
21 posts
Nov 10, 2005
7:04 PM
|
Bluesman yes
----------
yours in the sport Rick
|
motherlodelofts
469 posts
Nov 10, 2005
7:35 PM
|
Dave what are you suggesting ?
|
LONGS ROLLER LOFT
23 posts
Nov 10, 2005
8:42 PM
|
bluesman I also have a question. The words strike in the context of a union. The dictionary's definition is (striking, a blow, to strike. A union strikes a company. Your reference to a strike seems to be pointed at something. Want? P.s six people make a very small picket line. I have one more question. Is the time in rule unfair to any one person or certain group.does the new rule give any one person or group an advantage. The best rules are the rules that keep everyone on an equal playing field. And it takes good honest people to make those types of rules.
----------
yours in the sport Rick
|
motherlodelofts
471 posts
Nov 10, 2005
8:58 PM
|
Cliff again another statement out of context , as I said earlier "all" information of what is happening can be given at "anytime", but posts or parts of posts "cannot" be forwarded for reasons that have allready been given here , and that is exactly what Ron posted.
Where did "caught leaking" come from ??????
Cliff if you are going keep a shitting in your front yard be carefull not to keep stepping in it , and at least "try" to get the facts straight,so not to cause a rift where there should be none.
Scott
Cliff you wrote :
Dave, to know that one of the WC committee members on this list, who I will not name at this time, reported back to the WC Committee (Ron Duncan) that posts of the WC committee communications were available to the flyers on the lists, and that Ron sent a post to all the RDs stating if anyone is caught leaking this that they will be removed from the email committee list?! It sure shocked the h#%&* outta me! What's with all this secrecy? Are they running a Gestapo or a fly committee?! What's going on that cannot be revealed to every flyer in the country if need be?
Last Edited by motherlodelofts on Nov 10, 2005 10:57 PM
|
Ballrollers
173 posts
Nov 11, 2005
9:20 AM
|
Scott, I apologize for misquoting you about the NBRC. It was not intentional. I guess there is a difference between "Who cares?" and "Who needs them?" when you were referring to the NBRC. I agree with you that we all need to be as accurate in referring to other men's posts and in conveying information that we receive second-hand. Communication and conveying our thoughts is difficult enough without distortions. Thanks for setting the record straight.
Kevin, I only mentioned Ron's name because I did not know how else to describe him as the position of authority in the WC. I regret it if it cast him in a negataive light. This is not about him. I do prefer NOT to use names in our discussions. We are discussing policies and procedures, here. And yes, you are correct. There is much that I don't know about those policies and procedures. That is why I am asking questions. Discussing those policies and procedures is as relevant to a flyer that has flown in one fly, as it is to the guy that has flown in a 100 flys, so I am not buying the "experience" argument.
YITS Cliff
|
MCCORMICKLOFTS
254 posts
Nov 11, 2005
12:23 PM
|
Cliff, if I am not mistaken, and I damn sure I am not, several folks both directly involved and not, have given you the answer to your questions. The proceedures have been provided. The people have been provided. It has all been laid out for you to pursue. Because, that is precisely the way the system works. At this point I think you are just preaching to be preaching. Because absolutely nothing you are saying now will change a thing unless you follow the advice given to you. It's not one of those things were you can get your way or sway the opinions of others, because those others and your way are not part of the system that is required for consideration of such an idea.
If you have a fight, you take it to the enemy. You don't stand around preaching to your own troops about how great the fight will be or how the enemy is at fault. Don't say it. Prove it by following the protocol given to you.
I guess I am just tired or reading the same thing over and over and over again in thread after thread after thread when the EXACT protocol to serve your idea has been presented. I am not condemning your concept, I am asking you to take the advice given to you and proceed from there rather than repeating and challenging people here with this topic every day.
Brian.
|
Ballrollers
175 posts
Nov 11, 2005
4:59 PM
|
Well, you have a point, Brian. We have at least three RDs right here that can give us their ideas on how to resolve these issues. I am not eligible do anything yet, and the WC has yet to acknowledge that my RD even exists! That's why I keep trying to give them the evidence to try to convince these guys. And I have to keep upping the anty with the evidence. So far, none of them seem to understand the problem as you and I, and others see it. With the WC flyers not having a vote in these matters, it is an absolute "must" that the WC make contact with their RD or the LADs to make sure each region knows the WC committee is in session and they have someone to represent them, which I believe is the their own protocol by definition. ( I'm brushing up on that now.) From what I am reading on these threads, the WC RDs on this list could care less, or take it as a personal slam, which it is not. It seems that it is not "their problem" as long as a quorum is present to conduct business. This is not my idea of representative government or democracy at work. Brian you're good at this stuff. How would you solve this dilemma? Do you see a problem as I have described it or am I jousting at windmills? YITS Cliff
Last Edited by Ballrollers on Nov 11, 2005 5:08 PM
|
MCCORMICKLOFTS
258 posts
Nov 11, 2005
5:23 PM
|
Cliff, my suggestion would be to utilize the tools of action provided by the various RDs on this forum, but most importantly, capsulate the various topics of disagreement and interest of you and those you are speaking for, into a strategic and informative package that can be presented to the WC Coordinator. CC copies to your RDs and LADs as well. That is how you get things done at this point.
There has long been a saying that the squeaky wheel gets the grease. But sometimes when that wheels squeaks too much, simply turning up the stereo to mute the sound of the squeaky wheel becomes the options many choose. Instead of wanting to fix it, they want to simply drown out the repetitive sound.
Brian.
|
Ballrollers
177 posts
Nov 11, 2005
6:03 PM
|
Solid advice Brian. I'll get to work on it! YITS Cliff
|
knaylor
31 posts
Nov 11, 2005
6:49 PM
|
Cliff, it is YOUR RDs responibility to contact Ron and get put on the comittee list. As much time as you spend complaining how the W/C is messed up you could have talked you RD into doing the right thing. It is that simple. Some of the questions that you asked were asnwered like Brian said. Then you proceded to tell us that we were wrong because you got the truth from other RDs. Have the RDs that are not involved contacted Ron or Myself and let us know that they are not included???? If not why???? Kevin
|
Ballrollers
181 posts
Nov 11, 2005
7:46 PM
|
Kevin,
My RD said that he called Ron again a couple weeks ago, and finally got through to tell him to put him on the list
(not sure of the timing, here). He (my RD)was told that he would be contacted by someone,(I presume maybe you?) but he has not heard anything back yet and is still not on the WC Committee list. Meanwhile I guess you had a vote on the WC judge for next year? Anyway, see what you can do to follow through on it. Uhhhh, I mean I will tell my RD to stay on it and be persistent until he gets some action. OK? Have any of the other ommitted RDs contacted you yet? Oops, still not your job, I guess. How about I'LL contact them and tell them to keep beatin' down your doors! LOL I'm just funnin' with you now Kevin. YITS Cliff
Last Edited by Ballrollers on Nov 11, 2005 7:50 PM
|
knaylor
33 posts
Nov 11, 2005
8:24 PM
|
Cliff, everytime a new RD is to be added Ron emails me and lets me know to add them. Then I send them an email explaining how to get on the list and then I send them an invite. I will not put anyone on unless Ron confirms it first. I am not sure why Ron would tell them that someone will be contacting them soon. It has never happened that way before. I know Ron is reading these post and he will clear up this issue when your RD contacts him. Also No ommited RD has contacted me or Ron that I know. Also there was no vote on the W/C judge because there was no need.(only one person was willing.) Kevin
Last Edited by knaylor on Nov 11, 2005 8:26 PM
|
Ballrollers
183 posts
Nov 11, 2005
10:01 PM
|
Thanks, Kevin, for trying to clear things up. I can only go by what my RD tells me. Who knows? I guess we're all a little tired of this thread!! Later, Cliff
|