LETTER TO THE EDITOR

[Anonymous]

#4287

For one reason or another this letter has missed the last 2 News letters. However, people affected (implicated) in the Exective’s 3  monthly report  still feel they need to be heard.This then is  giving them their say. Dear Editor I refer you to the last Executive Report published in the April 2013 News Letter.This letter is written without prejudice in the hope that some consideration will be given to a matter of considerable concern to members of our organisation.This matter is not about bygone days but events that are happening. I had hoped the president would have addressed this matter in his Podium (May News Letter) , he  has been made aware of this matter.This letter to the Editor I might add, is my 2nd? in 25 years. Both have been because of my concern for the well being of the BMWORNZ... I’d rather just ride my bike.There are a lot of upset ex executive (and other non Executive members) in Auckland, and I might add in other parts of New Zealand at the moment. I am  also writing  this on behalf of those members who have rung ,and spoken to me in person with dismay about the “ non financial part” , of the  ex Treasurer's report on the financial status for the BMWORNZ / first quarter . Members are at a loss to understand why the President and his executive allowed the “Matters to Consider”, “Accounting” and "Appreciation of Effort” written by ex Treasurer, Phillip King to be published in this forum.  Yes, we know everyone has a right to say what they want.  Phillip King had his say as Treasurer, and tabled his report at the October 2012 AGM.  This was challenged by many people at the meeting.  I might add not only by the ‘low life’ as he called a group of concerned members who challenged him on his other views, before he resigned and walked out. In our opinion, for the unity! of the Register, it could, and should, have been placed in the Letters To The Editor, had he wanted to publish his views. We believe he has not been an Executive member since October 2012. We believe he agreed to assist( advise) our new Treasurer only.  We feel the executive should not have given him the forum he has used as he is an ordinary club member.  This "report"? casts many doubts on the integrity of previous executives and members who for years attended the monthly committee meetings.No one wants a witch hunt! And the Register certainly does not need one!  We feel it is the principal of the matter,  and this in all fairness, should not be allowed to happen again.The ex Treasurer's “report”?published in the Executive forum has caused a significant amount of upset to some members. In their time, they also worked tirelessly for the good of the Register. We all took flack some times. It goes with the job. Most members do have the normal god given amount of intelligence required to ride a motor cycle and read a news letter Mr king, and despite all of our obvious faults, do appreciate the work that goes into the running of the Register. But hey this is the newly revamped constituted Register and this is now our only monthly forum to let the Executive know how we feel about their 3 monthly meeting outcomes as published in the News Letter. It seems to many of us that by sanctioning this, the President and his Executive are complicit with, and are seen as supporting”all” of member, Phillip Kings views and attitude, and the right to have them published in this forum?.The President stated in his first News Letter “Podium,” after the disastrous October 2012 AGM "Things were said in the heat of discussion that might have been better unsaid”.. We ask. Why then allow such a divisive report to be published in the executive forum, when clearly the person who wrote it has in our opinion, has an axe to grind?  Terry Ellis-SmithAuckland Area RepPast PresidentLife Member

[Dave Morris]

#17682

looks like this post might be another cricket score in the stats for posts and views.

[Niall Deehan]

#17683

As I see it, this letter is a major cause of concern for our club, not because Terry chose to write it, but because it has not been published in the Newsletter, for whatever reason. There are obviously issues which need to be addressed, discussed, or at least acknowledged, because ignoring them is not sensible or in keeping with what our club is about. The Newsletter is currently the only means of communication between the President/Executive and the membership because this forum is not being used for that purpose. That is their choice I guess, but I would like to see a more proactive use of the website. Communication in any organisation is very important, and the present perceived lack of it could threaten the club that we belong to.Finally, and stating the obvious, if the unpleasantness which occurred at the last AGM is to be avoided in future, then there has to be some dialogue, orally or in writing, before the next AGM.

[Anonymous]

#17684

The Newsletter is currently the only means of communication between the President/Executive and the membership because this forum is not being used for that purpose.

We have the facility to establish a private forum for issues that would be, perhaps, more wisely discussed in a less public place than here, where all the world can see. (But I can perfectly understand using this Forum when any Register member feels their correspondence is not dealt with adequately: it's a great way to attract attention.)Such a Forum would require extra work for Folker, because whoever is Web Thingee, be it me or my successor, would have to verify any applicants for that Forum were current members of the Register. That status would have to be confirmed, and the list purged accordingly, each financial year.We could also embrace technology such as video conferencing or podcasting to disseminate information to the membership, but many of us are technological dinosaurs who won't be comfortable with such methods. Certainly such methods would leave out those who rely on the printed newsletter alone for information.One side of my brain would love to see the Executive be bold enough and open enough to respond to Terry in the light of day in this Forum, but the "Walk a Mile in Somebody Else's Shoes" side of my brain says I wouldn't do so if I was an Executive member.Watch this space..............

[Dave Ross]

#17685

One side of my brain would love to see the Executive be bold enough and open enough to respond to Terry in the light of day in this Forum, but the "Walk a Mile in Somebody Else's Shoes" side of my brain says I wouldn't do so if I was an Executive member.Watch this space..............

I guess it depends on the response. It was unwise to publish the former Treasurer's ramblings in the official part of the newsletter. Perhaps it wasn't read for some reason or another. A member only forum could help to gain more public input (from members of course), so the executive has a chance to float ideas, before diving in head first and then realising that there was no water in the pool (hehe). When we still had the 20 strong committee, the executive could do just that. Anyone who has attended these meeting could see and hear that executive would be set straight very quickly, if they had strayed too much of the path. It was pretty much out in the open. I am not seeing this level of accountability at the moment. This doesn't mean that there is a conspiracy under way, but it does show a certain arrogance to assume that they know best and should be left to get on with it, or what ever the wording was, that was used by the ex-treasurer. The American constitution starts with "We the people..." , not unlike over there, it seems to have become "We the executive....I think Baz is right about the need to address this in more detail by the executive. I believe the President should make some sort of stand and tell us if he agrees with the sentiments of the ex-treasurer and if not, why was he allowed to vent in the official section of the newsletter. The buck has to stop somewhere, as they say. Perhaps he could write a letter to the Auckland section that outlines his thoughts on the matter, because like Bwucie, I can't see him posting here on this topic. However, if he did make an effort in the future to communicate his intentions in the forum, perhaps he would get some considered responses. I am sure the moderator could police this without too much hassle.

[Anonymous]

#17686

I am sure the moderator could police this without too much hassle.

You mean somebody trustworthy is going to replace me some time soon, Alex? 😉 😉 😉

[Richard Kuysten]

#17687

I am sure the moderator could police this without too much hassle.

You mean somebody trustworthy is going to replace me some time soon, Alex? 😉 😉 😉

Be a shame to loose this forum to the censor, we'd have to dig out the old flags!

[Dave Ross]

#17688

I am sure the moderator could police this without too much hassle.

You mean somebody trustworthy is going to replace me some time soon, Alex? 😉 😉 😉

Be a shame to loose this forum to the censor, we'd have to dig out the old flags!

I've got no say in this  :). I was thinking along the lines of weeding out inappropriate language, because I can see how tempting it would be 😉

[peter.trub]

#17689

Could someone please enlighten me as to what the desired outcome of Terry Ellis-Smith's letter is?

[Dave Morris]

#17690

as i predicted a really rubbish cricket score type post yet again. 98 views but since ya got people posting more than once it really is becoming that cricket score I predicted.

[Dave Ross]

#17691

Members are at a loss to understand why the President and his executive allowed the “Matters to Consider”, “Accounting” and “Appreciation of Effort” written by ex Treasurer, Phillip King to be published in this forum.

Well, Colin, I suspect he wants an explanation.

[peter.trub]

#17692

It would appear you are right Mr Bell, I noticed on the Stats that Terry was online for some period of time tonight but obviously never felt the letter he wrote was important enough to clarify. However it seems Koko has once again chosen to represent Terry and has replied on his behalf. Is the reply from Terry and posted on his behalf Koko? if not then it would be better perhaps if he answered himself.I must say as Area Rep I was extremely dissappointed to recieve a copy of his letter through the BMWOR email service. While I accept that there must be a forum for greviance's I have no desire to be lobbied by other area reps on personality based percieved wrongs.If a member of my area comes to me with an issue I will approach the Executive on their behalf (They can if they so choose approach the Executive members direct, as can all members).From Terry's actions in writing (which after careful consideration I believe) two extremley personal attacks on the executive. Then his subsequent inaction in both cases to explain himself I would struggle to take seriously any thing written by Terry in any forum.When I read his first letter to the editor I was dismayed that a person who so proudly flaunts his life membership could write so destructively. A poorly written and thinly veiled crude attack was what I read. Now we have another that appears to be being demanded entry to the News Letter.Do I want to see this sort of garbage in what is currently excellent News Letter? Do I want to see this played with petulant kids trying to get the last say? No I dont. Do I want to see it swept under the carpet? No.I will make this request thru the open forum,Terry, send your letter to the executive. To the Executive members, report on it after it has been dealt with at a meeting. Thats how the system should work people, simple as that. Colin Lister

[Dave Ross]

#17693

It would appear you are right Mr Bell, I noticed on the Stats that Terry was online for some period of time tonight but obviously never felt the letter he wrote was important enough to clarify. However it seems Koko has once again chosen to represent Terry and has replied on his behalf. Is the reply from Terry and posted on his behalf Koko? if not then it would be better perhaps if he answered himself.I must say as Area Rep I was extremely dissappointed to recieve a copy of his letter through the BMWOR email service. While I accept that there must be a forum for greviance's I have no desire to be lobbied by other area reps on personality based percieved wrongs.If a member of my area comes to me with an issue I will approach the Executive on their behalf (They can if they so choose approach the Executive members direct, as can all members).From Terry's actions in writing (which after careful consideration I believe) two extremley personal attacks on the executive. Then his subsequent inaction in both cases to explain himself I would struggle to take seriously any thing written by Terry in any forum.When I read his first letter to the editor I was dismayed that a person who so proudly flaunts his life membership could write so destructively. A poorly written and thinly veiled crude attack was what I read. Now we have another that appears to be being demanded entry to the News Letter.Do I want to see this sort of garbage in what is currently excellent News Letter? Do I want to see this played with petulant kids trying to get the last say? No I dont. Do I want to see it swept under the carpet? No.I will make this request thru the open forum,Terry, send your letter to the executive. To the Executive members, report on it after it has been dealt with at a meeting. Thats how the system should work people, simple as that. Colin Lister

Do you struggle with reading comprehension?

[Richard Kuysten]

#17694

Colin, you've made it quite clear what you think of Terry's letter, I wonder if you'd care to let us know what you thought of Phillip King's words as reported in the minutes of the last AGM.

[Anonymous]

#17695

The response to Terry's letter turns out to be contained in the “President's Podium” in the June Newsletter.In other words, the Executive had reacted to Terry's letter and made a public reply in the medium that reaches ALL members, the Newsletter, before Terry made his post on this Forum.Which is pretty much how the system oughta work, you would reckon.Mr Bell will possibly have something pungent to say about this after all the smoke and ire Terry generated - so I'll leave the editorial comments to him...................

[Author]

Posts