Clubs becoming Federations ????

[Guest]

firstly to clear up the numbers game the west of scotland has 11 lofts and there fore cannot be a federation going by the "rule book". partnerships and non flying members do not count. t3doo you have come on here before and made an a**e of yourself trying to justify the actions of mr barlow and his dwindling band of followers and yet again ypour posts have no substance to give them any worthly credit.

 

secondly bruno people in glass houses should not throw stones. remember mark from barbylofts, short and repressive memory. :o

 

i also see you have no comments on the massive ayshire club/fed which has also been given a delegate, i wonder why.

 

 

Last point first, Greengrass, I am not in the loop so to speak, so have no 1st hand info on what is happening to whom, where & why. Because West of Scotland club was mentioned, a club that I had never heard of, and I genuinely did not understand how 'clubs could have federation status' I asked two questions on it. Again. as before, I genuinely do not understand or know anything about 'a massive club in Ayrshire with a delegate'. I hope I have explained myself a bit more clearly than you did when you 1st posted the thread, so now at least you know why I have no comment on it.

 

Middle point next: Again I have little idea what you are talking about ... throwing stones?  I simply recalled what I knew of Dumbarton and that was very little and a fair while back. If you object to my term 'survival strategy'  would you have rather seen the people stopped flying doos?

 

The only tussle I recall having with Mark was on a matter of principle, about a picture he posted up. Is this another grievance-cum-vendetta in the making, to throw up in the future, with similar complete irrelevance to the topic presently under discussion?

 

First point: Why didn't you just post this information up and ask for comments? What would you suggest should happen to these clubs? For my part, I would point to the present time and the aged membership: people are leaving pigeons in droves and there must come a time when a club or federation cannot make the numbers. What then? Put them out the game too or alter the rule book to suit present day circumstances? On the railway : is the Conductor, are you still walking back a mile on the E&G to protect your train today?  Of course not. Why?  Because rules must change to cater for today's changed circumstances and must not be used to penalise people for circumstances over which they have no control.

[Guest]

bruno remove this if you like. i am used to it. i fail to see the consistency in your posistion when as a moderator, what a most innappropriate choice of word, you clearly take an aggressive pro shu stance in any debate concerning the same organisation. you appear to be incapable of thinking like a reasonable inmdividual. you habitually come across as a self appointed and opinionated know all. you post web addresses pointing to articles and discussion papers on many subjects. while you may well have located and read some of these same articles your content in your postings give the impression that you have severe difficulty in understanding the content. you regurgitate other peoles work and attemt to lay claim to the implioed understanding that you somehow feel this gives you. in this current discussion you are clearly waitng in the wings to savage the comments that you can not handel. this is not moderation this is poor judgement and shows a complete lack of skill and maturity. i hope you understand that this is only a personal reading of the current situation and accept that this is only fair criticism and not intended to offend. the shu like your self have repeatedly and maliciously refused to operate within their own rules and constitution. the fact that more and more people are becoming aware of this is not the posters to this forums fault. a poor example will eventually lead to a poor response. any organisation experiencing problems should invest in small mirrors for the management committee. this is usually the quickest way of identifying where the problem originated. the mirror is excellent in that it will also identify where the solution to the problem should be located.

 

There is nothing aggressive in my stance here. I posted two questions on what I thought to be the main themes of the thread, because I genuinely had no understanding / knowledge of the matters under discussion ... (1) a club which had a SHU delegate, and (2) a club was named that I'd never heard of before.  

 

I did not post anything on shu-bashing other than acknowledge (in the reply to my post) that I had seen it,  I did not take any action on it, and I didn't raise it either.

 

As in a similar reply of mine to someone else, your post sounds very like a grievance-cum-vendetta, full of irrelevances served-up on what is after all a single question & answer post of mine, and bears no relation to anything I have said or done in this thread.  

 

 

 

 

 

  

[GREENGRASS]

Firstly bruno in a earlier post you mention that if you don`t know about a situation or incident you dont post about it, you then admit to not knowing anything about the dumbarton situation but it did not stop you posting some very biased opinions regarding it so i take it you are then by your own words guilty of double standards, why.

 

dumbarton attanded a meeting of the glasgow fed took part in  democratic vote and lost it, then tried every underhand trick in the book to get a "payoff" from the fed, the details of which have been posted on here numerous times before so i wont go over them again.

 

you seem unable to seperate your role as a moderator from your personal opinions, and as you know the two should never mix.

 

 

 

[johno]

bruno since i was last here you seem to have gained the gift of clairvoyance. you as usual make assumptions and attempt to throw in buzz words in a vain attempt to retrieve your situation. once again you take the position of the know all. how do you know what i or anyone else sounds like. the mere fact that you somehow think you have been generous with your childish self appointed control of the delete is a massive indicator of your failure to grasp the situation. there is no need for anyone in this site to have a dig at the shu. the shu are doing an excellent job at making a foolish laughing stock of themselves in my opinion. no vendetta no grievance just opinion pure and simple. the example being set by the shu is not anything today with me posting or anyone posting. once again you have totally misread a posting. as tom jones may its not unusual.

[Guest]

Firstly bruno in a earlier post you mention that if you don`t know about a situation or incident you dont post about it,

 

May I remind you that I came in with post 12, which was two questions for information because I didn't fully understand what was being said in the previous posts:

 

"Bit confused on the main theme of this thread:  

 

(1) How does a Club get Federation status, which I take to mean that it has an SHU delegate? What is the criteria?

 

(2) Wondered where the West of Scotland club in this thread was? Only West of Scotland I can find is a Fed, 4 clubs, around Dumbarton."

 

 

you then admit to not knowing anything about the dumbarton situation but it did not stop you posting some very biased opinions regarding it so i take it you are then by your own words guilty of double standards, why.

 

You are now referring to my second post, and this was after my query had been answered: you were talking about Dumbarton club. I posted earlier recollections of the geographic area, and I knew what that meant to the club when it left Glasgow Fed (for whatever reason), hence the Renfrew Fed arrangement. I did not know anything about what happened to the club after the Renfrew Fed arrangement and until this thread, would have assumed it was still 'status quo'. Now that I have learned that the club appears to have reformed into 4 clubs, I gave the opinion that it did so in order to survive, I don't think that can be called a biased opinion.

 

I will say nothing about the Glasgow Fed / Dumbarton dispute as I know absolutely nothing about it. I do know they went their seperate ways.

  

you must walk back 1 1/4 miles to secure your train, and 300 yards for assistance procedures

 

 

My working knowledge of the railway rule book ended in 1998. The point of my post was that rules must surely change to cover current developments. In times of falling membership, there will come a time when your own club and possibly every other club will not make the numbers that you seem to have etched in stone for all time. I do hope that someone will do something to accommodate the fanciers that are left clubless and fedless thro no fault of their own.

[Guest]

bruno since i was last here you seem to have gained the gift of clairvoyance. you as usual make assumptions and attempt to throw in buzz words in a vain attempt to retrieve your situation. once again you take the position of the know all. how do you know what i or anyone else sounds like. the mere fact that you somehow think you have been generous with your childish self appointed control of the delete is a massive indicator of your failure to grasp the situation. there is no need for anyone in this site to have a dig at the shu. the shu are doing an excellent job at making a foolish laughing stock of themselves in my opinion. no vendetta no grievance just opinion pure and simple. the example being set by the shu is not anything today with me posting or anyone posting. once again you have totally misread a posting. as tom jones may its not unusual.

 

More or less a repeat: your post is full of irrelevances and bears no relation to anything I have said or done in this thread.  

[GREENGRASS]

 

 

(1) How does a Club get Federation status, which I take to mean that it has an SHU delegate? What is the criteria?

 

 

this was the whole purpose of the thread bruno but you seemed to have missed it, how does a club get federation status and a delegate to the shu. you are a member of the shu please tell us.

 

 

(2) Wondered where the West of Scotland club in this thread was? Only West of Scotland I can find is a Fed, 4 clubs, around Dumbarton[/i]."

 

nobody ever tried to stop dumbarton from flying their doos they effictively stopped themselves. let me ask you does this situation sound familiar, attend meeting vote on proposition, loose vote, leave to create own club. so going by your prevoius postings shouldn`t dumbarton have stayed and tried to sort it out from within, are they walkers, survival tactics, can you see where i am going here bruno.

 

 

I will say nothing about the Glasgow Fed / Dumbarton dispute as I know absolutely nothing about it. I do know they went their seperate ways.

  

closing the stable door after the foal has bolted here bruno.

 

 

 

 

 

Changing the rule book to keep up with modern times

 

 

on your point of falling membership i actually agree with you more federartions/clubs should merge to combat the numbers decreasing but do you think it will ever happen, thought so. on your mention of club members numbers being cast in stone maybe need a stonemason as the west of scotland club have banned mr traynor and his son well when i say banned they wrote to the cumbria region sec of the rpra and advised him that the loft location of mr traynor and son had been banned, now check you rule book and tell me where it states the shu has power to ban a loft location. ps. mr traynor has still not recieved his letter to inform him, strange but true.

[Guest]

Well we are simply going round in circles, Greengrass.

 

 

I posted originally to ask for the criteria for what I took to be some special arrangement where a club could have an SHU delegate.

 

If Dumbarton had a chance to resolve the dispute it should have stayed and worked it out. That is what happened recently in Fife, but there were still casualties.

 

And on the railway rules thing. Could spend all year on this as you know, I used it supposedly for illustration purposes: then walk for miles, now phone for instruction.

 

[johno]

bruno far from being repetitive i would suggest that you fail to take account of members being observant. your post number 20 of 32 here you clearly indicate that you have taken the word of one member of the board as against a number of others. you take a position based solely on the perception of one individual. no balanced view no attempt to confirm anything. clearly biased and prejudiced. you then are shallow enough to refer to a unilateral decision taken by you not to savage the posts which are in oposition to your position. you attempt to defend the actions of individuals and organisations who are basically tearing up the rule book. you then hypocritically level accusations of irrelevance and repeptition against other members of the forum. it is only a matter of time before posts will be censored before they are posted on the forum the way you are going in my opinion.

[GREENGRASS]

bruno your opening line in your last posting proves that you did not fully read my previous post so perhaps you should do so.

 

the reason you are going in circles is you have  tried to have sly digs at a situation that you have admitted to not knowing anything about, very poor show.

 

 

 

[frank-123]

the new management of the shu iam sure will look at the delgate position of west  coast fed  

but when the new president is put into position give him time he will cut out the bad and leave the good then the sport in scotland may get back to being one

 

to the delgates of the shu

would you go to such lengths to keep yourself in power or would you take a rest and enjoy your birds

vote them out for the good of the scottish pigeon game lets move forward with new ideas that can bring us back together

 

[johno]

well said bart

[Guest]

well said bart Bruno i dont want to get involved in the bash bruno campain (lol) but i think you are missing a point what people are trying to say is at the shu every important decision that is taken is at the spring meeting ie officals sub commities etc and the delagets all vote thease people into office so the more friends you can get to that meeting (ie delagats) the better chance you have to succeed in any thing you want for the following year a bit of a chicken and egg situation now look at the shu pres. position at the moment he does not have a fed to represent L/F voted him out his loft is in the same place so why join the DUMBARTON CLUB O! SORRY FED just to stay in power fi------shy if you ask me

[me]

WHY OH WHY STILL DISCUSS THIS THE GUYS WHO RUN THE SHU AT PRESENT WOULD GIVE A BUNCH OF SCHISTERS A BAD NAME. THEY WILL GO TO ANY LENGTH TO KEEP THE MEMBERS UNDER THEIR THUMB. TAKE A BIT OF FREE ADVICE FROM "ME" DON'T BUY A SECOND HAND CAR FROM THESE GUYS!!

[Guest]

bruno far from being repetitive i would suggest that you fail to take account of members being observant. your post number 20 of 32 here you clearly indicate that you have taken the word of one member of the board as against a number of others. you take a position based solely on the perception of one individual. no balanced view no attempt to confirm anything. clearly biased and prejudiced. you then are shallow enough to refer to a unilateral decision taken by you not to savage the posts which are in oposition to your position. you attempt to defend the actions of individuals and organisations who are basically tearing up the rule book. you then hypocritically level accusations of irrelevance and repeptition against other members of the forum. it is only a matter of time before posts will be censored before they are posted on the forum the way you are going in my opinion.

 

Johno Post 20 was in response to a member who tried to alter my own reading of what the main themes were. I was interested only in knowing the answer to two questions, where this club was, and how it could get an shu delegate. I had seen the other points raised in this thread and referred to by that member, but these didn't catch my interest either as member or moderator, and just as there are many many posts in many threads in many forums which similarly don't interest me as much as others, I wasn't interested in these, only the two things I asked about. And on the point of repetiton,,, again,,, I'm not here to shred or police anything. Thats what a Code of Conduct is for, members are supposed to abide it and it is only when they don't that action is taken. Why should I take out the posts to which you refer?

 

Since I was actually asking about the rules, I was in no position to even comment on let alone 'defend the actions of individuals and organisations who are basically tearing up the rule book.' because initially I could find nothing about clubs and shu delegates. My judgement on the actions pointed out to me was based solely on the 2006 SHU ring list which shows a West of Scotland Fed with 4 clubs. The posts preceding my original question provided numbers which appeared to support its existance, and with an in-depth geographical knowledge of that part of the country I can say  that it had no easy affiliations and followed a perfectly legal survival strategy at that time. Following a strict timeline, you will see that Greengrass provided further more up-to-date information on current numbers in this Fed which appears to show the numbers now no longer add up. And I have left it at that with another question 'so what is now to happen, have these people to be put out of pigeons?

 

And your last point is again,,, repetiton,,, and again,,, I'm not here to shred or police anything. Please try do something positive about your problem with discipline and authority, it is becoming more evident with every post.

[Guest]

bruno your opening line in your last posting proves that you did not fully read my previous post so perhaps you should do so.

 

the only person calling you a "liar" is yourself.

 

the description of the railman you have given could be one of two people, i have sent you a pm with their names rather than post them openly on here, i have also sent you the reason why they could not have told you what you claim they did.

 

 

the reason you are going in circles is you have  tried to have sly digs at a situation that you have admitted to not knowing anything about, very poor show.

 

my work location and job description have nothing what so ever to do with anything on this thread,but for some reason you felt the need to bring it in to it. so who is it that using the "hook".

 

like i said earlier people in glass houses and all that.

 

 

I feel several misunderstandings were cleared up, Karl, in our PMs., which I feel have cleared matters up for both of us.  I got answers to my questions and I'd like to leave it at that. Thanks.

[me]

"Johno Post 20 was in response to a member who tried to alter my own reading of what the main themes were. I was interested only in knowing the answer to two questions, where this club was, and how it could get an shu delegate. I had seen the other points raised in this thread and referred to by that member, but these didn't catch my interest either as member or moderator, and just as there are many many posts in many threads in many forums which similarly don't interest me as much as others, I wasn't interested in these, only the two things I asked about. And on the point of repetiton,,, again,,, I'm not here to shred or police anything. Thats what a Code of Conduct is for, members are supposed to abide it and it is only when they don't that action is taken. Why should I take out the posts to which you refer?

 

Since I was actually asking about the rules, I was in no position to even comment on let alone 'defend the actions of individuals and organisations who are basically tearing up the rule book.' because initially I could find nothing about clubs and shu delegates. My judgement on the actions pointed out to me was based solely on the 2006 SHU ring list which shows a West of Scotland Fed with 4 clubs. The posts preceding my original question provided numbers which appeared to support its existance, and with an in-depth geographical knowledge of that part of the country I can say  that it had no easy affiliations and followed a perfectly legal survival strategy at that time. Following a strict timeline, you will see that Greengrass provided further more up-to-date information on current numbers in this Fed which appears to show the numbers now no longer add up. And I have left it at that with another question 'so what is now to happen, have these people to be put out of pigeons?

 

And your last point is again,,, repetiton,,, and again,,, I'm not here to shred or police anything. Please try do something positive about your problem with discipline and authority, it is becoming more evident with every post." -Bruno

 

 

 

 

Bruno length wise your posts take up more room than anyone elses but  for why? It is clear you have a certain agenda and you treat people you see as "friends" in a different light than those you seem to think of as "enemies".

 

Let me try and make this as obvious to you as I can from my profesional background.

 

Think the worse thoughts you have ever thought about the lads in fife who left the fife fed!

 

Done that now try to appreciate the same thoughts are applicable to the Dumbarton lads who left the Glasgow fed after they took part and VOTED in their AGM.

 

Now why is the current President of the Shu joining an organisation like that?

 

Payback maybe?

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

Short answer Me: I don't think ill of anyone, so fall at the first in your test.

[johno]

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.

[Henrik]

In reply to some postings on here and to clear things up The East of Scotland Federation is and always has been affiliated to the SHU. We have 4 clubs and 43 flying lofts which if need be can be made into 8 clubs so we have more than enough to Quallify for our SHU delegate

[THE FIFER]

cheers henrik.

[GREENGRASS]

henrik did the east of scotland change it name this year, the one mentioned was a "championship club" is this seperate from the east of scotland or is this a new one, or maybe  midweek club or trainning club etc.

[Henrik]

In reply to the above post from Greengrass our Federation has never changed its name never will change its name and no it its not a Midweek or Training Club.

[GREENGRASS]

well have you heard of a new club called a "championship club" mentioned over in the east. does anyone with a ring list for this year see any mention of a "championship club" located in the east, or does anyone know anything about it.

[frank-123]

lanarkshire federation have 500+ members and have three delegates

so the west of Scotland having 20 members has one delegate  

the east of Scotland has 43 members and one delegate

anyone know how this split works

 

members = delegates ???????????????