Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Vic2

CPS committee changes debate

235 posts in this topic

It's too easy to get around multiple login monitoring and hence using CPUK as a voting system is not a gaurantee of democracy, it could work if you have to login using something like your cps membership number and password.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite the opposite, we want the process to be as open and as far reaching as possible. We are not blocking ideas, but have merely set out the stumbling blocks we have to overcome both practically and financially. We are debating the pros and cons of the ideas presented and glad to listen to all suggestions. Furthermore we will be looking into how other Committees overcome these issues and looking at how we can change the current rules to accommodate change. Online voting exposes us to a lot of risk, and for me a postal voting system would hold more merit. For instance, only tonight I have been in a debate on whether we could use a similar system used to elect school governors, which includes candidates providing a written submission. There are many other examples to look at too. Candidates also need to fully understand what roles the various Committee posts entail and the commitment needed, so they are clear what they would be getting in too. There is a massive advantage to both the Committee and the membership to get this right and we are committed to deliver on this.

Tim

I won't have long to wait to see what changes, if any, are made during the AGM. For me there are too many 'problems' and not enough 'solutions' being proposed to peoples suggestions in this thread. If I took this approach in my work then I would probably not be employed for very long. Change requires driving and is often opposed as it usually requires additional effort. Call me a sceptic, but I'm not holding my breathe but prepared to proven wrong. Tim, I believe that you are a proactive committee member as are one or two others in this thread, but I'm not so certain of the remainder. I have deliberately not chosen sides between Vic and the CPS, as I'm not privy to all the facts, but what I have observed since becoming a CPS member is a website that is next to useless, due to lack of updates, and a certain resentment to change anything.

Edited by mobile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree,change needs a driving force.It can seem bad at first but it needs to be done,as can be seen through this thread.

Iam not taking sides either,but i too think we need a better system.

If anyone wants the job,put your name forward with a short introduction and your aims for the future of the society.

Then by however means let the membership decide.

A few members at an AGM is not a fair way.I know they are the only ones who "could be bothered to turn up"but it should be voted on by every member,either postally or by e-mail etc.Could this be done with membership renewals?

If Steve and Paul get re-elected then it would be by the majority and no one could complain.If they didn't they couldn't complain either,but we still need people like then to run and organise the "big shows"as they have the knowledge and experience.

In short we all need to pull together for the society,in the same direction-forward.

ada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voting on the forum could be safe and secure.

You would...

Create new user group, say CPSmember. You would need CPS ID number and email confirmed to join this group. (we now know only CPS members in this group)

Create a new forum, say CPS Only. Set permissions so only CPSmember user group can see or enter this forum. (we now know only CPS members can enter forum)

Start a poll in new forum. Software allows only one vote (no way round this).

NO one can know what a member votes (not even forum Admin)

So it can be done and can be safe.

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voting on the forum could be safe and secure.

You would...

Create new user group, say CPSmember. You would need CPS ID number and email confirmed to join this group. (we now know only CPS members in this group)

Create a new forum, say CPS Only. Set permissions so only CPSmember user group can see or enter this forum. (we now know only CPS members can enter forum)

Start a poll in new forum. Software allows only one vote (no way round this).

NO one can know what a member votes (not even forum Admin)

So it can be done and can be safe.

Andy

Hi Andy,

That's interesting. Presumably we'd have to buy the forum software and host it plus set all this up. But it can be done. Personally I'm still undecided on this but I'd be slightly in favour of postal ballots if only because it is simpler if not the cheaper option. With on line voting we have to allow for those who either don't want to vote that way or are unable to. We'd have to remove all voting in person at the AGM of course.

If we did go this way would you be available to help?

Before we went this far I think I'd like to take a straw poll on this forum on a separate thread. See what sort of support there is out there and act accordingly. I've only seen a few members so far in favour but who knows how many are lurking out there.

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil, Yes I would be available to help in any way.

It would be a good idea to have poll to see what other people thought. You can start a poll at anytime or PM me with details and I can start one.

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please calm down, Phil; I'm worried about you. :suicide_fool-edit:

Aw how sweet!

I think it's apparent to all that the CPS Secretary enjoys his authority, saying "NO" and denying me a right to speak.

Interesting that when you have nothing else to say you revert to insult and belittleing. Ah well - nothing new there then.

I've proven on several occasions now - and you have admitted it yourself, Phil - that you have not told the truth about me.

Ah but you really ought to get your dictionary out Vic, blow off the dust and look up the difference between a lie and a mistake. A mistake is an unintentional error and when I make them I correct them as soon as I can. A lie is a deliberate attempt at deception. Hmm - much like the quotation above eh?

Look back over your writings: Can you see now why so few are prepared to stand up to you?

No, not realy. I reserve all my vitriol for you mate!

As the insiders know over the Rick and Alan crisis, you told the Committee that the affair was being handled "at Trustee level" and the constitutionally ruling Committee would not be involved, but told of the outcome afterwards.

Yep. And your point is what?

Your own promotion to the Trustees was presented (by your long-time colleagues Steve 'n' Paul) as a fait accompli to the Committee, who had no say at all in the matter.

Yep. Trustees are appointed independantly of the committee. I like to think I was asked to be a trustee because I was the longest serving committee member after Steve and Paul and so had a bit of experience. But you never know - you might be right!

IMHO, Steve 'n' Paul brought you in to do all the work for them.

Yeah maybe you're right. Still I don't mind - after all I've got pretty broad shoulders.

'Nuff said. I'm getting back to suggesting positive ideas for improvements.

Oh that's good. When you have some can you let me know?

Take it easy Phil,

I will. It's so nice to know you care!

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I won't have long to wait to see what changes, if any, are made during the AGM. For me there are too many 'problems' and not enough 'solutions' being proposed to peoples suggestions in this thread. If I took this approach in my work then I would probably not be employed for very long. Change requires driving and is often opposed as it usually requires additional effort. Call me a sceptic, but I'm not holding my breathe but prepared to proven wrong. Tim, I believe that you are a proactive committee member as are one or two others in this thread, but I'm not so certain of the remainder. I have deliberately not chosen sides between Vic and the CPS, as I'm not privy to all the facts, but what I have observed since becoming a CPS member is a website that is next to useless, due to lack of updates, and a certain resentment to change anything.

Solutions are being looked at and taken on board. No suggestions made to help the CPS are being ignored, workable or not, as all contribute to taking us forward to what we all want - a successful CPS.

If I did all my work on an open Forum I would be out of a job, and just because it is not all being seen it does not mean it is not taking place.

That said I totally understand skepticism at this time and we look forward to putting a smile back on the members faces.

Finally, for now, for my part the recent potential solutions on voting being offered are taking us a few steps forward, so please keep up that debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd actually prefer online voting to postal voting - obviously those without it would have to have a postal option.

Post does go astray and if the votes were being counted by the current committee, the result would be open to accusations of being 'biased' or tampered with.

Edited by Phil Green

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd actually prefer online voting to postal voting - obviously those without it would have to have a postal option.

Post does go astray and if the votes were being counted by the current committee, the result would be open to accusations of being 'biased' or tampered with.

Any postal votes would need to be counted by a totally independent person, i.e. someone not affiliated with the CPS in any way. It would be totally unacceptable to have a member or committee member involved in this process. Given the numbers, I very much doubt that the very small percentage that could possibly go missing in the post would make any difference to the end results. The problem with having both online and postal voting will be with the policing to ensure that no member votes using both methods. Lets not forget that the Chairman has not got involved in any way with this discussion and could possibly be opposed to the idea.

Edited by mobile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your own promotion to the Trustees was presented (by your long-time colleagues Steve 'n' Paul) as a fait accompli to the Committee, who had no say at all in the matter. IMHO, Steve 'n' Paul brought you in to do all the work for them. Take it easy Phil, Vic
Yeah maybe you're right. Still I don't mind - after all I've got pretty broad shoulders. Phil

When the CPS Secretary agrees with me publicly about the undemocratic actions and suspected motives of his fellow Trustees Steve Cottell and Paul McKeown, two things are clear:

i) I've been telling the truth;

ii) Steve Cottell and Paul McKeown should not be Trustees and leaders of the CPS.

And... er... I suggested anonymous online voting on CPUK for the CPS elections, might I add. :sun_bespectacled:

Vic

P.S.

I must also say in Phil's favour [No!! Ed. :shock:], that he is at least considering the online voting idea, and responding to it.

Which is more than can be said for Steve Cottell and Paul McKeown, who are mute and invisible as always and - incredibly - are still going to stand for Chairman and de facto Vice-Chairman again. They also won't hold elections for their Trusteeships, I hear. So much for democracy in the CPS leadership...

Given the choice, I'd much rather vote against Steve and Paul than Phil. :yes:

Edited by Vic2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phil, Yes I would be available to help in any way.

It would be a good idea to have poll to see what other people thought. You can start a poll at anytime or PM me with details and I can start one.

Andy

Seconded, but need to be quick with the straw poll, gentlemen:

Not everyone looks at CPUK every day, and the AGM is only 6 days away.

Please feel free to use this thread, if needed:

It's not run by a CPS Committee member, and it has nearly 3,000 hits, so a lot of people are looking here for this subject.

(Feel free to change the name of the thread too to reflect the vote, Andy & Co. The current one sounds a mite too contentious for the positive way things are moving!)

Vic

Edited by Vic2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have renamed this thread.

I have started a poll here for CPS members to have a say on how they would like to the vote is done to elect the CPS committee.

Please vote HERE

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have renamed this thread.

I have started a poll here for CPS members to have a say on how they would like to the vote is done to elect the CPS committee.

Please vote HERE

Andy

Hi Andy,

I meant to do something along these lines yesterday but was out most of the day. Can we all please bear in mind that while this poll is democratic in some sense of the word, it's not necccesarily representative of feeling in the CPS membership because members and non-members alike can take part. And is there anything to prevent people voting more than once?

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Andy,

while this poll is democratic in some sense of the word, it's not necccesarily representative of feeling in the CPS membership because members and non-members alike can take part?

Phil

Truly unbelievable... :sun_bespectacled:

The CPS Secretary is already setting the stage for the CPS refusing to accept the results of the straw poll for online voting he himself suggested. And the poll's barely started!

Please bear in mind that it's democratic, private, online elections covering the majority of the CPS membership that's being voted for.

Lapsed, wavering and prospective CPS members have all been following this topic. I think their opinions count, too?

It's not the online CPS election itself, for Heaven's sake. That will be securely limited to CPS members.

But, FWIW, as a non-member, I vouch that I shall not vote in the straw poll.

(Andy & Co, if you can confirm my abstinence, please feel free).

Vic

Edited by Vic2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can we all please bear in mind that while this poll is democratic in some sense of the word, it's not necccesarily representative of feeling in the CPS membership because members and non-members alike can take part.

It also excludes all CPS members who are not members of this forum and all those who do not have access to the internet.

But, it is a start and it doesn't need sniping comments from anyone.

Flick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's only meant to get a feel for what people want.

A few things to know.

1. You can only vote once, there is no way around this (unless you have two accounts here)

2. It is true non CPS members can vote on this poll. You would have to have a CPS only user group to get a real true result.

3. It is a secrete vote, no one knows who voted or for what (not even Admin)

Please ONLY CPS members vote

Thanks Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It also excludes all CPS members who are not members of this forum and all those who do not have access to the internet.

But, it is a start and it doesn't need sniping comments from anyone.

Flick

Agreed, Flick - it is a start. :sun_bespectacled:

And the straw poll doesn't exclude anywhere near as many CPS members as the AGM.

Where a few tens of members represent the views of several hundred, with an open show of hands in a mass vote for the Committee.

Perhaps the CPS website should have an advert for the straw poll, and an email-shot to members?

Sadly, not enough time for a snail-mail shot, unless the AGM date can be changed. (Not very likely, of course).

Vic

P.S.

My comments are entirely valid, Flick. Perhaps they're hitting a sensitive point?

Edited by Vic2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed, Flick - it is a start. :sun_bespectacled:

And the straw poll doesn't exclude anywhere near as many CPS members as the AGM.

Where a few tens of members represent the views of several hundred, with an open show of hands in a mass vote for the Committee.

Perhaps the CPS website should have an advert for the straw poll, and an email-shot to members?

Sadly, not enough time for a snail-mail shot, unless the AGM date can be changed. (Not very likely, of course).

Vic

P.S.

My comments are entirely valid, Flick. Perhaps they're hitting a sensitive point?

Please don't make this personal yet again. I am stating the obvious and not trying to be negative or obstructive or personal.

Flick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all the discussions and now a poll I thought I'd draw a few threads together. These represent my own feelings and opinions and not those of my fellow committee members and definitely not the CPS.

Voting. I accept that voting by a show of hands is unfair because not every can or wants to attend the AGM. That is a fair enough comment. But to replace it with another means of voting that equally disenfranchises another section of the membership is also equally unfair and for that reason I have to oppose voting by email or via this forum. Not everyone has email access or there are some members who through choice or personal circumstances don't even have a computer. That's hard to believe possibly' but it is true!

Therefore I have to rule out voting purely by electronic means. Voting by post is the obvious option. It is the lowest common denominator since presumably everyone has access to a stamp and a letter box. It is simple to administer - we can send out voting slips along with society publications. And it is easy to track and verify. If anyone wanted to challenge the system all we need do is show them the voting slips. We can also do the vote anonmymously and put in some very simple systems to prevent attempts at voting more than once. Someone suggested that votes would need to be counted by someone independant, which is plainly ludicrous. To be honest, if you think we are going to fiddle the system in our favour you have a very low opinion of us and I think you should either vote us all out or just find another plant society.

The other suggestion of a combination of a postal and electronic voting system is interesting but I can't quite see how it can be administered simply. Would we have to register a member as an e-voter or a postal one (that can be done of course) and how do we deal with the situation for instance where someone can't vote electronically because of an Internet or computer failure? I'm not ruliing it out but I'm not convinced since it just seems to be adding another tier of bureaucracy. I know that we keep saying this but you have to remember that we are not professionals. We do this in whatever spare time we happen to have!

Looking on the poll at the moment I'm quite surprised that no one has voted for postal voting alone. It's simple, relatively easy to administer and it can be verified very easily. Sure it's a little more difficult to find a pen and mark a X in a box and stick it in the post when compared to a few clicks of a mouse. I may have this wrong but I seem to remember that the ICPS have elections for their board by postal ballot.

Elections of committee members. This brings another issue that I'd like to investigate. In every year that I recall, the CPS committee have been elected unopposed. Now there may be many reasons for this such as us lot not advertising the posts properly (I only throw that one in, I'm not offering an opinion here). I suspect though that the real reason we are never opposed is that for one reason or another, not one else is interested in the job. I can remember just one instance in my twenty odd years of committee where we had more than one candidate for a position on the committee. And there are multiple instances where jobs go unfilled for a long time because we are unable to get anyone willing to take them on. In my case for instance I first become Newsletter Editor because no one else wanted the job. I then took on Membership when the current membership secretary dropped out, because no one else wanted the job. I then passed membership over to Dennis and later took on the journal again when we lost our then current journal editor though it was agreed that this would be temporary until we got someone else in to do the job. It took two years before Tim offered to take over! And now I am General Secretary because this post had been vacant for quite a few years and we could get no one to fill the post. I've been trying to remember how long the secretary's post was vacant for and I think it was at least five years despite advertising in the newsletter, the society website and presumably this forum.

So can you see a trend here? If you think that having elections by ballot of any description will give you a choice of who to vote for then in almost every case you will be disapointed. Unless of course there is a seachange in the attitude of most members. Whether this is through general apathy or just a lack of talented people willing to give up their spare time I don't know. But I can't see it changing and indeed it's the same on every other club or society committee that I've served on.

So how do we deal with voting for a committee member who is unopposed? Well in just about every other election that I have come across you don't vote for an unopposed candidate. They are elected by default because there is no one else to stand against them. In fact the only way you can vote against an unopposed committee post is to have a Yes/No vote, which is effectively a vote of confidence. Now I am not against this as such since I think a committee member would have to do pretty badly to warrant over 50% of the membership voting him or her off. But it's a pretty poor way of running a society. Even a poorly performing committee member is better than none at all. And if it's not possible to drum up enough enthusiasm to stand against a poorly performing committee person what hope is there of replacing him or her? And in fact the committee is all too aware when one of us is not doing their bit and we can and do step in before it ever gets to the point of elections anyway.

And there is a further problem with voting off people from the committee which has very serious consequences potentially for the society. If the membership vote off a crucial committee post - say for instance the treasurer, then the society is going to have extreme difficulty functioning. Vote off the journal editor and you don't get a journal. Vote off the entire committee and you effectively close the society down. Possibly I'm being a bit melodramatic here and I accept that it's very unlikely that any committee member would actually be voted off the committee (Vic can't vote fortunately!) but this is the sort of thing that we have to consider.

So undemocratic as it may seem, I am in favour of electing any committee post that is unopposed by default, so effectively without voting. How does that grab you? My hazy memory of the ICPS elections is that positions on the board are elected not every year but over several years and that there are always, or almost always at least two candidates to vote for.

Next item - selection of committee candidates and/or members. As I've already said, we have the greatest difficulty persuading anyone to take on committee roles. It's not as if we are stuck for choices here! And for that reason the committee has always had the option to suggest candidates either within the committee itself or from outside. A committee post has two functions. There is the job for which you are elected for (membership, journal etc) and then there is the general management of the CPS role. This takes two forms - we meet two or three times a year for a committee meeting, which is extremely useful for thrashing things out and getting reports etc. And then there is day to day management which takes place by email. I helped introduce a system where we could vote by email on some issues so that we didn't have to wait for a full committee meeting to take a vote and make a decision. This has introduced a further dynamic to the committee which means we can respond quickly where we need to. Well that's my opinion anyway! All this is preamble to introduce the idea that as a committee I think that we need to check any potential candidates and approve them before submitting them for election. If nothing else this is to make sure that the candidate has a certain level of committment. For instance we've had people on the committee in the past with no email access, which makes communications rather difficult. But being on the committee is not just about doing a certain job. We want committee members who will take an active management role and personally, I think that it only fair to let potential committee members know what they are letting themselves in for. I have no doubt that this will be construed as being undemocratic and if that's the case then so be it. I don't think democracy means that anyone can stand for any post unless they are willing to show a level of commitment to carry out their job.

As part of the selection I'd like to see any candidate providing a small piece detailing how they intend to carry out the post, and what if anything they think they can add to the role. That applies to people who put themselves forward either in opposition to an existing committee post or who are applying for a vacant one. It also should apply to any committee person who the committee seek to bring in. It's a bit of an exercise but to be frank, if someone can't come up with something of this nature then they are unlikely to have much time and energy for the post they are intending to occupy anyway. And why should we ask this? Well quite apart from trying to find out if the candidate is up to the job, we need to present something on the voting form for the membership to use to make a decision about when voting. This is what happens with the ICPS board elections. There is a brief piece of probably no more than 50 words detailing experience and specialist skills and what the person intends to do if elected. There would be deadlines of course - probably one or two months before the election took place.

One other point. The committee has always had the option of co-opting people to take on roles mid-term as it were. There are pure practicalities here. There are certain roles on the committee that are crucial for the society to operate. I list just as a few roles that of seedbank, membership and treasurer, though I'm sure my fellow committee members can list plenty more. It makes no sense to lumber through an election process mid-term which can take months if these jobs need doing. Obviously someone else on the committee will usually jump in and take over temporarily but this is less than ideal. None of us has much free time to do our own jobs let along someone else's. So we can and will co-opt a member to a committee post unelected. Again, if this seems undemocratic then I make no appologies. Pragmatism has to take over at some point! I think it fair though to offer up the position for proposals from the membership at the relevant time and so any co-opted member of the committee effectively takes the role on as a temporary post. That's possibly unfair to the person offering to do the job but it does seem relatively democratic.

The question then arises about what do about the case where a vacant position has only one candidate, which of course takes me full circle back to my original point! Do we elect someone unopposed by default. Do we offer them to the vote or do we seek from somewhere an alternative candidate? The latter option of bringing someone or anyone in as an alternative candidate seems to me to be fraught with difficulties. It's hard enough to persuade people to stand for committee but to persuade them to stand in opposition to someone else?

I'm in favour of offering even an unnoposed new committee post for election despite my misgivings about only having one person to vote for simply because getting a vote does give them some sort of mandate from the membership. But it's hardly ideal is it? Election by default if unopposed is the other option and while I'm not exactly keen on this idea either it does seem to have some logical simplicity.

My last comment is that I hope you can see that we do put a lot of thought into what we do on the committee! It's so easy to sit at your keyboard and type something onto a forum but it's way more difficult to think through the consequences of any decision you make because we have to try to get it right first time. That's not open criticism and indeed this whole topic of how and why we have committee elections is a very good discussion to have. We've always said that the society is run by the committee but we always listen to comments from the membership. That doesn't mean you should all assume that we will act according to how the membership here think we should do of course. Neither should you assume that just because we don't comment from time to time that it means we aren't listening.

And of course! if anyone out there really does think that they have some good ideas about where to take the CPS please consider joining as a general member of the committee. General members are different in that they have no specific role on the committee but they do take part in the managment role.

And my final final point is that I'm sorry that this is so long a post! If I could condense this all down to half a dozen words I would. :sun_bespectacled:

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Truly unbelievable... :rolleyes:

The CPS Secretary is already setting the stage for the CPS refusing to accept the results of the straw poll for online voting he himself suggested. And the poll's barely started!

Well hardly. As ever you make it personal when you don't like something you hear. You've attempted to do the same with Flick's response too. If you ever thought to think before you post you might have worked out that I suggested the poll in the first place! Why would I suggest a poll if I was not going to listen to what is voted for?

All this depends on what the rest of the committee think but if there is an overwhelming majority in favour of some sort of extended voting system then my next suggestion is to give the membership a true chance to vote properly by postal ballot giving the reasons for and against and allowing our members to make up their own minds.

Please bear in mind that it's democratic, private, online elections covering the majority of the CPS membership that's being voted for.

Well you need to qualify that sweeping statement. How many members of the CPS are also active members of the forum? Andy might be able to give us details. You can't defend this because there is no legal way for you to know.

Lapsed, wavering and prospective CPS members have all been following this topic. I think their opinions count, too?

If you think my statement is unbelievable I can't believe you've just said this. And in public too! Lapsed members can easily make their opinions count by returning as members. I don't like to make assumptions but surely it's obvious that if someone doesn't renew they don't really want to belong to the CPS and they can't complain when their opinions are not asked for! Prosepective members can join and make their opinions clear. Wavering members the same. This is the CPS not some political party.

It's not the online CPS election itself, for Heaven's sake. That will be securely limited to CPS members.

No it isn't an election itself. But you for instance will treat it as such won't you? And it's not limited to CPS members either.

But, FWIW, as a non-member, I vouch that I shall not vote in the straw poll.

Well we only have your word for this don't we. You are deceitful and duplicitous. Why should we trust you on this?

Now - I am going to give you a further challenge. I for one and tired of your constant sniping on this forum against me, Paul, Steve and Flick. I don't think you have the balls to stand up in person and make the sort of accusations against us that you do here but for the sake of fairness I'm going to give you the opportunity. I am inviting you as my personal guest to the AGM this Saturday. You can state your criticisms to me in public in front of those members who can attend. And if there is any sort of consensus among the membership who attend that you are correct in your personal attacks I'll resign there and then. Call it a vote of confidence if you like. But - and it's a big but. If the consensus backs me up then you will accept that you are alone in your opinions and you will stop forever these personal attacks on this or any other forum. That's not a gagging order. I'm not asking you to sign any piece of paper and I'm aware that it's hardly democratic though no less so than a staw poll here on this forum. I'm asking you to consider it as a gentlemen's agreement and I'd like to think that you have the decency to accept it as such.

We can agree to a format later but I suggest five minutes for each of us, uninterrupted. You go first with your argument against me and then I'll respond. We'll do it before the election of officers because there is no point in me being re-elected if there is a chance that I might have to resign ten minutes later. You can stick to the facts or you can just stick to personal slurs. I don't really care to be honest. It's your five minutes so use it the best way you can to influence the vote.

If any other members of this forum think that Vic should accept the challenge please state so here. Even if you are fed up to the teeth with his constant attacks please come forward. I also give my personal guarantee that unpopular as he is with the committee, that he will be treated in no other way than any other guest to the AGM. I can leave my personal animosities to one side. Can you Vic?

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please don't make this personal yet again. I am stating the obvious and not trying to be negative or obstructive or personal.

Flick

Speaking for myself, it's never been personal, Flick.

I'm deeply concerned for the CPS, and the strenuous attempts made over the years to hide the cause of the problems and resist attempts to improve things.

I'll say again, you are an excellent Treasurer and a nice person. :yes:

Steve and Paul are also nice - I like them much as people - but the same faith in selfless contribution and commitment to the CPS cannot be said of them. It's the plain truth.

The CPS Secretary has been brave enough to agree publicly, as he (and you) both did in Committee in 2009.

At last, the time has come to save the CPS, methinks :rolleyes:

Go well, and I hope you're standing again as Treasurer and Trustee,

Vic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First step would be to open nominations I assume.

As Phil says, discussing voting is a bit pointless if there's nobody to vote for.

But if you can get two people per post, and they submit statements, then it's progress I suppose.

I design the papers for a few NHS elections each year. An example is here: Example statements

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well hardly. As ever you make it personal when you don't like something you hear. You've attempted to do the same with Flick's response too. If you ever thought to think before you post you might have worked out that I suggested the poll in the first place! Why would I suggest a poll if I was not going to listen to what is voted for?

All this depends on what the rest of the committee think but if there is an overwhelming majority in favour of some sort of extended voting system then my next suggestion is to give the membership a true chance to vote properly by postal ballot giving the reasons for and against and allowing our members to make up their own minds.

Well you need to qualify that sweeping statement. How many members of the CPS are also active members of the forum? Andy might be able to give us details. You can't defend this because there is no legal way for you to know.

If you think my statement is unbelievable I can't believe you've just said this. And in public too! Lapsed members can easily make their opinions count by returning as members. I don't like to make assumptions but surely it's obvious that if someone doesn't renew they don't really want to belong to the CPS and they can't complain when their opinions are not asked for! Prosepective members can join and make their opinions clear. Wavering members the same. This is the CPS not some political party.

No it isn't an election itself. But you for instance will treat it as such won't you? And it's not limited to CPS members either.

Well we only have your word for this don't we. You are deceitful and duplicitous. Why should we trust you on this?

Now - I am going to give you a further challenge. I for one and tired of your constant sniping on this forum against me, Paul, Steve and Flick. I don't think you have the balls to stand up in person and make the sort of accusations against us that you do here but for the sake of fairness I'm going to give you the opportunity. I am inviting you as my personal guest to the AGM this Saturday. You can state your criticisms to me in public in front of those members who can attend. And if there is any sort of consensus among the membership who attend that you are correct in your personal attacks I'll resign there and then. Call it a vote of confidence if you like. But - and it's a big but. If the consensus backs me up then you will accept that you are alone in your opinions and you will stop forever these personal attacks on this or any other forum. That's not a gagging order. I'm not asking you to sign any piece of paper and I'm aware that it's hardly democratic though no less so than a staw poll here on this forum. I'm asking you to consider it as a gentlemen's agreement and I'd like to think that you have the decency to accept it as such.

We can agree to a format later but I suggest five minutes for each of us, uninterrupted. You go first with your argument against me and then I'll respond. We'll do it before the election of officers because there is no point in me being re-elected if there is a chance that I might have to resign ten minutes later. You can stick to the facts or you can just stick to personal slurs. I don't really care to be honest. It's your five minutes so use it the best way you can to influence the vote.

If any other members of this forum think that Vic should accept the challenge please state so here. Even if you are fed up to the teeth with his constant attacks please come forward. I also give my personal guarantee that unpopular as he is with the committee, that he will be treated in no other way than any other guest to the AGM. I can leave my personal animosities to one side. Can you Vic?

Phil

I'd love to come, Phil!! :rolleyes:

Thanks muchly for the offer. I fancy getting some new plants from the good people who bring them for sale.

But it's a bit short notice, I'm afraid; I've been booked to go out with friends for some while now, as the Society's letter to me made it crystal clear that I wasn't welcome at the AGM.

If you can change the date to something mutually convenient, I'll happily come.:yes:

Btw, I have never lied on this subject, Phil. (Unlike yourself?)

You know it, and I have already provided proof of this, where it doesn't embarrass people who don't deserve it.

I have no personal animosity to you, as I've tried to make clear to you previously.

You are responsive to the membership, are willing to improve things, and you do your best for the Society, as you see it.

Why you cover up for Steve and Paul, and appear to hate me, are a bit beyond my ken. It's definitely not reciprocated.

In fact, I'm concerned that you might burst a blood vessel or otherwise harm your health in your 'spirited' defence of Steve 'n' Paul and attempts to discredit me and the truth. I've told others of my concern for your wellbeing, and I've moderated my responses to you, out of genuine kindness. (Believe it or not, old friend, but it's again the truth!!) :D

All I've done is point out the flaws in your arguments, the points where we agree and highlight the truth.

We were friends once. (The cider was v.good, btw). I have no prob's with being friends again.

But I won't be part of a cover-up for Steve and Paul's neglect and self-interest, as I was before. As leaders and Trustees, they are killing the Society.

Sincerely,

Vic

Edited by Vic2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First step would be to open nominations I assume.

As Phil says, discussing voting is a bit pointless if there's nobody to vote for.

But if you can get two people per post, and they submit statements, then it's progress I suppose.

I design the papers for a few NHS elections each year. An example is here: Example statements

Thanks Alexis, your examples for NHS are exactly the sort of thing we need.

Thanks Phil for your time and for expressing exactly everything I have wanted to say and tried to write about the committee and elections in the last few weeks but couldn't get the wordings right.

I absolutely agree about postal votes, it is absolutely the fairest way. Also an election should only need to be held if there more applications for posts than candidates. I was a Parish Councillor for 16 years and that is how we did it. If the candidates equalled or were less than the number of positions available - all were elected by default and then the sitting council invited applications from village people willing to be co-opted.

I would also like to state that I was upset and offended by the suggestion that any of us would stoop so low as to rig a vote! What would be the point? I am Treasurer and Trustee, because I am a trustworthy person. We are talking about an amateur society with charitable status not a despotic regime.

Flick

Treasurer, CPS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0