Vote Rostam!!!

Badlad

Administrator
Staff member
Well I would. 

The BCA AGM is this weekend with two candidates standing for chairman.  Rostam is by far the best to lead the association forward IMO.  He's young (ish), engaged and a devout moderniser.  He is politically astute to all of BCA's weird and wonderful ways and has a deep understanding of the constitution, rule book and policies. 

He's a medical doctor, of course, so potentially a life saver amongst the usual elderly BCA council member  ;) ;)

Give him a chance  :beer:

Good luck Rostam from me.  I might even rejoin BCA if you get in  ;)
 

Oceanrower

Active member
Personally I don?t care who gets the job, I long ago gave up on politics in organisations.

But I do find it VERY off that an administrator (and, I believe, owner) of the biggest caving website in the UK feels it appropriate to endorse one candidate over the other.

You may well claim it?s your own personal opinion but the word ?administrator? clearly shows under your user name.
 

Badlad

Administrator
Staff member
Thanks for the endorsement Oceanrower.  I don't have any connection to BCA anymore and think I am entitled to my opinion after all the thousands of hours I have spent volunteering for British caving.  Go Rostam is my opinion.
 

PeteHall

Moderator
Oceanrower said:
But I do find it VERY off that an administrator (and, I believe, owner) of the biggest caving website in the UK feels it appropriate to endorse one candidate over the other. 

Because (owners of) media organisations should not hold (political) opinions?  :confused:

That's certainly a new one  :LOL:
 

NewStuff

New member
If the BCA wants to move forward, it needs to keep the people that want change in. If other people want that change to happen, they're going to post about it. Tim is as entitled to hold and express his view/choice as any other person. To say otherwise is depriving them of a choice, vote or voice, and *that* is the "off" way of thinking. I may as well say you can't have an opinion because you like beige jumpers, it makes just as little sense.

And if Rostam does get in, that's enough of an indication that the BCA has changed for the better that I'll personally rejoin.
 

Ian Ball

Well-known member
I've not quite made up my mind who I want to vote for. Podcast two tonight, I listened to Russell yesterday and I was quite impressed, a man who has had a very fast rise to the top job because he is capable, or is it because as he joins the person above him gets mysteriously moved aside (bizarre gardening accidents?  :eek:  )

OR No reason for Badlad to not say his piece in my eyes, anything to get the debate going is a good thing in my book.

I might wait till the 13th day to vote just to pad out the BCA voting statistics.

Good luck candidates.








 

SamT

Moderator
Oceanrower said:
But I do find it VERY off that an administrator (and, I believe, owner) of the biggest caving website in the UK feels it appropriate to endorse one candidate over the other.

jeeeeezus...  o_O o_O o_O o_O o_O o_O

When will you lot get it in to your tiny little minds that UKcaving is just a Forum.... an open forum... not a "website".  It has no agenda, it can't push an agenda, the people, (owners if you must, but they are just long suffering facilitators) cant push an agenda.  How can they.  Anyone can contribute and push their ideas, which are there to be challenged, agreed with, supported, knocked down etc.

Its not a media outlet, there is no control over content (other than a basic level of moderation to ensure things remain civil and content is not slanderous/illegal/unsavoury etc etc)

Its an open forum where anyone... and I mean anyone can voice their opinions, and so long as thing remain civil, those opinions are not censored by anyone.

Why.... how... do people think that its anything other than that.. that Tim and Jane have any ability to push an agenda.

In my opinion Darknessbelow is a 'website' that publishes 'content' and its owners can choose which content it publishes.  I think it definitely pushes an agenda.

Tim and Jane are just Landlords of a caving pub.  They invite people into the bar to chat about all things caving.  They do not discriminately on grounds or race,colour,creed,gender,political or sexual persuasion  in any way.  Only, in a very few cases, has the odd trouble maker, been "barred", as would have happened in any normal pub.

Get grip people.

 

Pitlamp

Well-known member
As a BCA DIM, will I get an email inviting me to cast my vote? (My email is registered.)
Nowt's arrived yet.
 

Ian Ball

Well-known member
I don't think being DIM has an effect.

https://british-caving.org.uk/agm-2021/

If you don't have an email by midnight October 10th, contact the return officer.
 

andrewmcleod

Well-known member
Specifically:

If you wanted to vote at the AGM you needed to have registered to join the Zoom meeting. However, votes at the AGM are either housekeeping (and therefore uninteresting and uncontroversial) or just votes to push things through to the online ballot (with a very low bar set of _either_ 25% _or_ 10 people voting in favour in order to push it through to the ballot). Theoretically amendments could be proposed, but arguably any remotely controversial amendment (i.e. not just fixing a typo) should also go through to the online ballot.

The significant votes (elections and motions) will therefore almost certainly be pushed through to the online ballot and you should get an email through before it opens (but probably only shortly before it opens).
 

2xw

Active member
I wouldn't worry too much about Tim promoting his views, the CSCC reps are doing the same in their email networks in favour of Russell.
 

Jenny P

Active member
2xw said:
I wouldn't worry too much about Tim promoting his views, the CSCC reps are doing the same in their email networks in favour of Russell.

No doubt some people are supporting one person and some the other - anyone is perfectly entitled to let others know who they favour and why.  And similarly their views about the other proposals on the list.

As long as people make up their minds and actually do cast a vote we will get a result which accords with the majority view - whatever that happens to be.  (So some may be pleased and others disappointed - happens in national politics as well.)

Thanks to Ari & Co. for setting up the voting system as it has worked perfectly OK for me so I've already cast my votes on all the assorted proposals.
 

PeteHall

Moderator
Not sure what you've see 2xw, but I've personally seen no recommendations either way on who to vote for as chair from any of my clubs and there has been no recommendation from the CSCC on this point. Not that I have any problem at all with an organisation having an opinion and voicing it to its members.

For reference, the below was circulated on the CSCC mailing list:

All BCA members whose emails addresses BCA holds should by now have received an email with a 'voting token' enabling them to vote in the ballot for the election of BCA chair and on the various constitutional changes that have been proposed.

If you have not received this email, you should contact the returning officer and ask for this to be sent.

Voting will remain open until midnight on Sunday 31st October 2021.

Please forward this email to your members so that they know to expect an email from BCA regarding the voting.

ELECTIONS

There are two candidates for Chair, Russell Myers (current acting Chair) and Rostam Namaghi (currently the Publications and Information Officer). You can read their election statements here. There are also links to recorded interviews with both candidates linked from the same page.

Please take the time to read/listen and form your own views on the candidates.

 CONSTITUTIONAL PROPOSALS

1. ANCHOR SCHEME

The proposal to allow regional councils to appoint their own bolt installers is uncontentious and is supported by the CSCC Equipment Officer, Andrew Atkinson.

2. ALTERATION/REMOVAL OF NON-INTERFERENCE CLAUSE (s10.1)

This clause prevents the BCA getting involved in the internal workings of a member such as a club, regional council or access body unless invited to do so by the member.

A poll conducted by BCA of its members returned a majorty in favour of the clause remaining unaltered.

There are various alternatives to the current clause, but if you would like to keep the current position of non-interference, the way to achieve this is by voting against all the alternatives. That way, if they do not reach the margin required for constitutional change, all the alternatives will fail and the status quo will prevail, so it is not a case of needing to vote for what you might see as the least bad option.

3.  MERGER OF EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING COMMITTEES

This has been included under the heading of Simplifying the Bureaucratic Structure. Although in general, such simplifications are often a good thing, in this case, the inclusion of the merger of these two committees is a complication.

CSCC's Equipment and Training Officers are both against this proposed mergers, as is the BCA's Training Committee. To the best of my knowledge, since the resignation of the previous convenor of the BCA's Equipment Committee, the committee has not met to discuss the proposal.

The CSCC's Training Officer, Dave Keegan, read the following statement at the BCA eAGM on behalf of the BCA Training Committee:

"The training committee has discussed and is against the proposal as a whole. The issue is with the merging of training and E&C, and the committee is open to becoming a working group. The training committee is open to future discussions to streamline processes and improve the training on offer to the BCA in the future."

The CSCC's Equipment Officer, Andrew Atkinson, is also against the proposed merger. He believes that the two committees provide different perspectives and that a merger would have the effect of reducing overall safety standards. He has used the following example to explain his reasoning:

"Given a choice of knot, it is easy to do a test and say that in these circumstances this breaks at this force. Some knots are stronger than others. However, it may be that the stronger knot is really hard to make and difficult for people to recognise but works in situations where the weaker knot does not, and vice versa. It is equipment's role to look at the knots. It is a training role to look at whether the knot with less strength is better to be taught as it leads to less catastrophic failures in less experienced cavers. If the committees are combined it is likely only one will be deemed safe."

4. 5.& 6. RE-WRITES & UPDATING

All these seem uncontentious.I am happy to discuss any of the above further if anyone would like to contact me direct.

Linda Wilson
CSCC Representative on BCA Council 
 

JoshW

Well-known member
A poll conducted by BCA of its members returned a majorty in favour of the clause remaining unaltered.

Interesting, did I miss this poll? last I remember seeing was the vote at the last AGM with a majority wanting the clause to be changed
 
Top