BCA ballot

[NigR]

So I shan't vote and if it relates to Crow ( sic ) in any way folk should know that on Mendip I have not yet met a caver who wants anything to do with it.

Well, I was caving with two (younger) Mendip cavers just the other week (here in South Wales) and they are of completely the opposite opinion. In fact, they assured me that, outside of the control freak inner circle (what was it they called it, the "Hunterati" or somesuch?) and their acolytes, many Mendip cavers are of the same mindset as themselves. So, maybe you are not quite so well informed as you might like to think and have simply been meeting all the wrong people?

 

[Dave Tyson]

Well, I was caving with two (younger) Mendip cavers just the other week (here in South Wales) and they are of completely the opposite opinion. In fact, they assured me that, outside of the control freak inner circle (what was it they called it, the "Hunterati" or somesuch?) and their acolytes, many Mendip cavers are of the same mindset as themselves. So, maybe you are not quite so well informed as you might like to think and have simply been meeting all the wrong people?

.
This is precisely why the BCA constitution needs to be reformed so that its one person, one vote. At present the two level voting system means that the club vote can override the wishes of both CIM's and DIM's (and vice-versa). It will be interesting to see the result of the current vote and if the individual vote is in favour of the motions and the club vote is against so the motions fail, it may not bode well for the future...

Dave

 

[Simon Wilson]

I've had nothing about the ballot yet, no emails and nothing in the post.

 

[Cookie]

I've had nothing about the ballot yet, no emails and nothing in the post.

PM Sent

 

[topcat]

This is precisely why the BCA constitution needs to be reformed so that its one person, one vote. At present the two level voting system means that the club vote can override the wishes of both CIM's and DIM's (and vice-versa). It will be interesting to see the result of the current vote and if the individual vote is in favour of the motions and the club vote is against so the motions fail, it may not bode well for the future...

Dave

Neither of my Dales based clubs have consulted their members on the vote [nor the last one], so in effect the club vote is 'just' a committee vote...........and perhaps not even that.

 

[Ian Ball]

Hello Topcat, why won't you tell your two northern clubs your thoughts on the matter?

 

[droid]

Love the way people have the idea that this Forum represents the view of the caving fraternity in general. It *does* promote one particular view, and people voicing *the other view* tend to be suppressed.



The Ballot showed a greater percentage of nay-sayers than was represented on here.

 

[The Old Ruminator]

"Well, I was caving with two (younger) Mendip cavers just the other week (here in South Wales) and they are of completely the opposite opinion. In fact, they assured me that, outside of the control freak inner circle (what was it they called it, the "Hunterati" or somesuch?) and their acolytes, many Mendip cavers are of the same mindset as themselves. So, maybe you are not quite so well informed as you might like to think and have simply been meeting all the wrong people? "

Interesting comment. Am I in the control freak inner circle ?--- what fun. I rarely go to the Hunter's though. As for Cap'n Chris. He is a wonderful jolly young fellow and hardly every grumpy.
Sorry Mr and Mrs Mod I could not resist a small riposte.  :hug:

 

[andrewmcleod]

Love the way people have the idea that this Forum represents the view of the caving fraternity in general. It *does* promote one particular view, and people voicing *the other view* tend to be suppressed.

The Ballot showed a greater percentage of nay-sayers than was represented on here.

It is interesting how you get different sub-populations represented out of the same larger population.
The forum is fairly pro-whatever it is that it is (I was going to say pro-access, but surely everyone is pro-access, which just goes back to the whole debate being bloody silly in some ways).
The vote was fairly pro as well, albeit possibly slightly less than the forum.
Last year's AGM was mixed but probably not pro.
This year's AGM was over-whelming pro, which most of the objections being from pro people who had got the wrong end of the stick about a proposal from other pro people...

(I guess I am a Mendips caver now, living in Wells, and voted for all the different amendments even if I don't think all of them are/the process is perfect, and would the constitutional review Tim suggested at the AGM...)

Final comment: some people express their views in ways that are more likely to turn people _away_ from their opinions, and frustrate those of otherwise similar opinions... let's keep the debates civil and impersonal rather than turning it into the childish insult-slinging match that some many discussions about this seem to...

Consider this: if you have no sympathy and understanding of the other side's arguments, you can't understand them and so, being ignorant, should probably refrain from discussion until you _do_ understand why other presumably rational(ish) humans have landed on the other side of the fence to you.

 

[droid]

You make a valid point regarding ad hominem argument.

Just as irritating is the constant repetition of an opinion, in the hope it will become a fact.

 

[cap n chris]

Just as irritating is the constant repetition of an opinion, in the hope it will become a fact.

Seconded.

 

[Ian Adams]

Just as irritating is the constant repetition of an opinion, in the hope it will become a fact.

Seconded.

Thirded.



Ian

 

[NewStuff]

Let's keep the debates civil and impersonal rather than turning it into the childish insult-slinging match that some many discussions about this seem to...

Presumably this is directed, in part, at me...

I'll play nice when members of the "anti" crowd stop making things very personal and endangering my families livelehood. Words are one thing, I'll debate all day, but deliberately and knowingly endangering my job over a disagreement on caving? That's why they get branded with the  "dirty tricks" tag, that's why I am nasty. They like to paint themselves whiter than white, when in reality they are far from it.

Until then, I'll be exceedingly nasty towards those individuals, online and if it happens, in person. Not all "anti" individuals, just those that partake in making it personal.

 

[cap n chris]

I'll play nice when members of the "anti" crowd stop making things very personal and endangering my families livelehood.

Where and when did that happen in this thread?

 

[royfellows]

This comment is not directed at anyone at all in particular. Its a hopefully 'polite' reminder of one of life's great truths.
"What goes around comes around."

Too many people seem to be utterly convinced that right, or God, or whatever is on their side, and that the end justifies the means.
The end will never justify the means if entails dishonesty, underhandedness, so called 'dirty tricks' and whatever. In fact as above, it will go round in a huge circle and come back and bite you on the bum.

The trick is to play them along until they loose their balance, then wham.

Lessons of life drawn from aikido.

Try a change of tactics Mr Newstuff, think about it. and best wishes.

EDIT
Just visited aditnow, thanks for your kind support Mr Newstuff.
I have to state that I posted this before I saw that, I will never lie, its against honour code.

 

[NewStuff]

Try a change of tactics Mr Newstuff, think about it. and best wishes.

While I appreciate the sentiment Roy, It's an attempt to bully me into silence.

It *will not* be successful, I am far more stubborn and nasty than they can imagine and I react badly to low, underhanded tactics like that.

 

[paul]

[gmod]Whatever your opinions are or is happening elsewhere, this Forum has Acceptable Use Policies and those who contravene them will suffer the consequences. Please keep thing to a civilised discussion.[/gmod]

 

[NewStuff]

I'll play nice when members of the "anti" crowd stop making things very personal and endangering my families livelehood.

Where and when did that happen in this thread?

At no point did anyone say it happened in this thread, as well you know. Now, stop trying to play silly buggers.

Members of the anti crowd are persisting with that, yes I can prove it, and no, I will not let them spread the lie that they are whiter than white. You want a balanced discussion? That's part of it, I don't care if it hurts your feeling or isn't what you want to hear.

 

[cap n chris]

Totally bewildered. Where did I mentioned balanced debating, or claims of being whiter than white, or that my feelings were hurt etc.? Is this thread being mixed up with another one somewhere? Seems to me (and probably everyone else) that you're using thinly veiled (if it's veiled at all) aggression tactics in an attempt to bulldoze a topic the way you want it to go. It would be easy to agree with your self-description "nasty", methinks. PS, not anti, me; neutral/centre more like.

 

[MarkS]

[mod]Please let's stick to the topic: the BCA ballot.[/mod]