johno

bruno you appear to have gone mad.

again in my haste to respond i ommitted the fact that as you see nothing wrong with the use of these words will mean that all posters are bestowed with the same freedom of posting. may i also point out that you intervened to make it clear that my post was allegation. i do not see the same rigour applied to post 30. moderator? conflict of interests?

i do not think i referred to anyone as thieves or stealers. i referred solely to manipulation. you would appear to be trying to establish some kind of foundation for your biased and prejudiced stance bruno. unfortuinately for you your record is on the forum. fancy talking and closed ears will not create a solid foundation for a sound unbised debate.

apologise for incessant posts/criticisms. bruno forum posts statistics 2465 as of today. johno posts statstics as of today 167 including this one. strange but true.

i am not sure that the individual colleagues and co workers you are referring to would appreciate your thumbnail sketches. as i have said before if you are happy with your conduct then so be it. you are the one who lives with your conscience. as to your explanations of what you were trying to portray. the fact that someone else sees it different indicates you have failed with your origininal portrayal.

why is it that words and accusations of thieves and stlolen referring to fed members are now acceptable. post 30. where is the proof. where are the moderators. where is the delete button. one rule for some and one rule for others appears to be the code of the board. poor poor show.

bruno when the forum was set up before you arrived usernames were the norm. i fail to see your position. surely the content of the post is much more important than who posted it. once again you seem to think you are somehow superior in know how and intellect which allows you to be judge jury and executioner. the language displayed in reference to some of your ex colleagues says a lot about you. how do you sit easy with the moderators post. you appear to have no humility or charity. you astound me the more i see your actions in writing. the words you use like poisoned dwarf in reference to co-workers could well be construed as derogatory at best. you stated you wre supervisory and management. i suggest this would not be seen as good management or supervisory by any one. i am sure i seen you referring to your study of and participation in race forums and race policy within your employment. this post does niot indicate you were idealy equiped to be involved in either. finally by your own deduction no one will pay any attention to those using pseudo names so i fail to see how think you need to be so aggressive and off the wall on the subject.

bruno you are using your powers of prediction again. your post 105. the sarconic touch applied when you are grasping for explanations in a failed attempt to defend the underhand and ill conceived actions of the shu president show you in an extremely poor light. your comment about bolstering fed numbers is one of the most insulting and derogatory to members of this board i have ever witnessed. i will say no more but will let this rest with you.

name that toon

the members got what they wanted. majority won the day. democracy in action.

i fail to see how tha languge and terms in this post appear to be acceptable to the moderators when we have experience of what has been removed in the past.. where is the proof of funds been stolen. this is an extremely worrying post. even more worrying is the fact that one of the forum moderators added a post after it and seen no need to remove it.

a failed attempt to grasp at straws. post 24 rhis forum. no content relating to the post. after 4 days no denial of the so called allegations. today will let us see what the position is in reality. this forum has i feel done a tremendous job in allowing a constructive and reasonable discussion on the subject matter. open and even handed. this is the way forward and would lead to a much healthier and happier mood within the pigeon community in scotland and uk.

dandydoo sorry to go on but in my haste to make sure i was saying what i was thinking i failed to mention you would appear to be reading my post number 132 this thread in a completely different way to me. are my eyes cheating me. i fail to see any referenece to the shu. it may be that your gift of second sight has allowed you to see what others dont. paranoia comes to my mind. only an opinion.

dandydoo i made no comment about things i cannot substantiate. you have failed to see the point and have decided lets try and avoid reality by throwing in a few subliminal adjectives. spin and attempted cover. you also would appear to been given the gift of knowing what other people are thinking sub consciously. i would apprecitte it if you allowed me to decide what i was trying to say or do. that way we all might be able to move on. i was stirring nothing. i was referring to earlier posts that had been removed by the moderators. the reason given was that people wrere involving themselves in issues that they had no immediate connection with. i think you will find that if you have only shot part of your foot off it will still take some time to get better. good hunting

have had contact with delegates. story is as suggested. in the event that the allegations as they have been referred to are true. whod did this. what procedure was followed. why are there very few delegates or members aware of what is going on. why are no delegates in the know responding and blowing these so called allwgations out of the water.

bruno you are making too much sense. open and fair. will never be allowed in my opinion. unfortunately

have been made aware that somehow or other former shu president has mysteriously been manipulated into a position as a life long councillor. no one knows who rubber stamped this. not the members. not the delegates. also the secretary, a paid servant of the membership, has been phoning hand, picked delegates to encourage them to attend sundays meeting. this has been done at the members expense. this has not been approved in any way by the members or the council. the reason for the first mysteriuos appointment is to allow the person to attend the delegates meeting on sunday to speak on behalf of the current president. no doubt he will then attempt to vote. after the current presidents manipulating a situation to allow him to be a delegate this situation once again stinks. how can we continue to stand back and allow this to happen.

a question is still a question. asumption is just that assumption. we cannot read peoples minds.

bruno i take your point but in my wildest dreams cannot understand the level of expenditur for waht was needed. the software needed was surely available through the likes of microsoft. the fact that the shu do not even have a website says a lot. you again provide an out in asaying as long as they have. there is no evidence that they did. the office continued without headed notepaper for three years after the new sysytem was put in place. the invoices for supplies showed no vat registration number. people operating the manual system in 1980`s appeared to cope more efficiently with a higher mebership at the time. as to knowing what the spend covered i think when questions were asked detail was difficult to find. the salient point is that if members with the required experience and understanding of a system donot ask questions then who isgoing to. i include all the membership here not any individual. the overiding problem is that when the powers that be see any questioning as a threat then there is a serious problem with openess and accountability.

bruno a lot of the debate here ends up by people feeling they have to take sides. too many people respond to a post based on the person who is posting. we should be paying more attention to the content and the merits and demerits. my full position is that if posts are unbiased and factual they should be left. the full strength of a forum like this is that it provides a vehicle for people who for some reason orother either lack the confidence or whatever else to raise issues they feel passionately about through the channel of an agm or meeting in general. regardless of who the individual is this forum provides a great platform for more people to feel involved. in your own post you assume that because you hire someone to do a job they do it correctly. i have a great deal of experince that leads me to oppose this idea. if people would get away from the age old habit of believing labels placed on individuals by others with no knowledge and little research of the situation i feel we would be getting somewhere. some one who highlights a wrong is not entitled to be shot as the messenger. the freedom of raising issues no matter how uncomfortable it makes some people feel is a neccessity in ordeer to achieve reasoned debate and inclusive policy making. i intend this post only as a continuation of the debate and it is not an attack on any one. a question is just a question. it may be deemed reasonable by some and unreasonable by others. in the end it is only a question.

bruno i have one last question on the whole debate on positions being put forward. one of your qualifications is a Master of science degree in information systems management. you refer to this as computing. this was gained in the year 2000 at Stirling university. As a well versed and qualified source can you explain to me and many others the expenditure of in excess of over £25000 on computers by an organisation that has a turnover of less than £90000. As a well informed member what is your opinion on this expenditure by an organisation with a turnover equivalent to the income generated by the back wheel of an ice cream van?

bruno i wholeheartedly congratulate you on your qualifications. you have put in a considerable effort into achieving these qualifications. to achieve an MBA and an MSC are not by any means innsignificant achievments. unfortunate that these high levl qualifications leave you short of a basic understanding of accounts. i also know that companies depending on one line of infrmation like profit often fail through lack of efficient use of management accounting tools. i still feel it is dangerous to assume that pieces of paper confer on anyone the right to be all knowing and all seeing. i feel my own level of academic achievement combined with 30 years hands on knowledge is more than enough to be getting on with. once again i congratulate you on your academic achievements.

bruno your attempt at labelling me as having some sort of problem with authority or discipline once again clearly highlights your complete lack of understanding of people and your obsessive unwillingness to to listen to anything peopele say to you. as this is debate i will refrain from the condesending approach you have taken by deciding in your wisdom i have a problem. maybe you are too highly qualified for us mere mortals to be involved with. in the event that anyoneone had a conflict with authority or discipline it is unlikely they would have a problem with you as you have neither authority or the right of discipline or possibly even the sense to realise this. the implied or hidden message in these comments are common to your way of working. threat with the delete button. you answer no questions. you have no answers so you continually and habitually revert to attempted demonising and labelling. when you are cornered you go on the defence and deny all knowledge of what you have done. all in all without the delete button i doubt if you would be here.

all experience of the rpra would indicate to anyone who took the time to research their issues leads one to believe that one has an extremely good chance of getting a straight answer to any questions put before the appropriate forum. unfortunately this is not the case in other organisations. it would seem that you homer are obsessed with attacking the rpra for some reason. as in other posts you have offered on this forum there is no need for anyone to attempt to show you up in a bad light. you seem to be more than capable of attending to that on your own.

homer an excellent choice of phrase. you have done an outstanding job of showing yourself exactly as you are. i am sure all the members of the forum who read your post will be astounded by your guile and wit. have a nice day.