The RSOC and moving forward (this thread started by RS2000CUSTOM)

[NORTH YORKS RS SPARES]

Great Reply Martin

I agree 100%

no old faces back at all

Start a complete fresh with no agends

[kas750]

What a ****in mess.. I was looking to renew after a few years of membership but no way when I don't know where my money is being spent!

[i-am-the-peel]

thanks for posting up paul, i don't mean to split hairs, and honestly i really don't but

Steve minshull resigned before the last AGM

He then forced his way back onto the committee which most agree was a sham ,

the way i understood it it was the committee that put it to the floor to have a vote on having a vote, looking back (which is easy now i agree) that should never have happened or been allowed to happen.
like i say its easy to say that and you will have all dealt with it with what you felt was right at the time, although it has turned out to be a long running disaster unfortunately.

He then had a vote of no confidence against him by every member of the committee ( bar one who abstained ) ,

that would be all the committee members that attended the meeting (bar 1 abstention) and not the full committee as such ???

so about 7 or 8 people out of a possible 12 or 13

Dave Easton , again was not thrown out , He made some mistakes that he admitted , niw i feel he will say his bit at the AGM to clear his name , then and only then can the members decide if he was treated unfair

from whats been posted on the rsoc paul it seems that dave didn't resign though and very much the vote was tabled against him as he refused to sign the resigination that derek had alread written for him

i don't think the threads are viewable any more but the way i read them at the time it was a case of him being voted out. even derek posted at the time that he (dave) hadn't done the correct thing and resign which indicates he was removed.

so did he actually resign then or not

Please state facts Kev not what you would like others to believe

I am so looking forward to the AGM , as i feel some truth will be told ( i hope )

So dont bend what you say by saying Steve should be allowed back as he had previously resigned
So has Dave easton

so if you agree with no committee members who have previously resigned coming back , then neither of them can

,,I wonder if minds will be suddenly changed now , lol

paul i've suggested that i don't believe committee members that resign part way through the year shouldn't be allowed to go back onto the committee for the following twelve month period, i didn't mean at all, if say they resigned 5 years ago.

just a to clear up what i meant, as an example: you, clayton, derek, and duncan have resigned recently and part way through a year ( from one AGM to the next AGM) so i think it would be wrong for you to try and stand again for a committee position at this years AGM and the earliest opportunity open to you should therefore be 2016. (should you want to do it again )

[NORTH YORKS RS SPARES]

thanks for posting up paul, i don't mean to split hairs, and honestly i really don't but





the way i understood it it was the committee that put it to the floor to have a vote on having a vote, looking back (which is easy now i agree) that should never have happened or been allowed to happen.
like i say its easy to say that and you will have all dealt with it with what you felt was right at the time, although it has turned out to be a long running disaster unfortunately.




that would be all the committee members that attended the meeting (bar 1 abstention) and not the full committee as such ???

so about 7 or 8 people out of a possible 12 or 13







from whats been posted on the rsoc paul it seems that dave didn't resign though and very much the vote was tabled against him, i don't think the threads are viewable any more but the way i read them at the time it was a case of him being voted out. even derek posted at the time that he (dave) hadn't done the correct thing and resign which indicates he was removed.

so did he actually resign then or not



paul i've suggested that i don't believe committee member that resigns part way through the year shouldn't be allowed to go back onto the committee for the following twelve month period, i didn't mean at all, if say they resigned 5 years ago.

just a to clear up what i meant, as an example: you, clayton, derek, and duncan have resigned recently and part way through a year ( from one AGM to the next AGM) so i think it would be wrong for you to try and stand again for a committee position at this years AGM and the earliest opportunity open should therefore be 2016.

Steve and Dave had also previously resigned part way through a year

I thought people would now start adding bits , lol its ok now for Dave and steve because it was a while ago , lol

But not ok for us , lol

Let the members decide at the AGM , thats the fair way , after they have heard what everyone has to say

[i-am-the-peel]

Steve and Dave had also previously resigned part way through a year

I thought people would now start adding bits , lol its ok now for Dave and steve because it was a while ago , lol

But not ok for us , lol

Let the members decide at the AGM , thats the fair way , after they have heard what everyone has to say

so they've resigned part way through a year previously paul, i can't argue that as you will know more than me but what i was suggesting was that if someone has recently resigned part way through a year, like has happened this year 2014-15 that they shouldn't be allowed to apply for a position til a period of 12 months has past, so 2016 would be the first opportunity.

i don't think anyone resigning in say 2010 should be stopped from applying. anyway its pie in the sky as it was just a suggestion to try and add a bit of stability to the committee rather than people resiging after 9-10 months and then re-applying again 2-3 months after.

from what you've posted you seem to be suggesting that you want to apply again in the new few weeks for a position ??

also could you confirm that dave infact did resign and didn't have the vote put against him after refusing to sign dereks pre-written resignation .

[Rallye]

Does this thread not constitute Spam, getting very boring now.

[NORTH YORKS RS SPARES]

so they've resigned part way through a year paul, i can't argue that as you will know more than me but what i was suggesting was that if someone has recently resigned part way through a year, like has happened this year 2014-15 that they shouldn't be allowed to apply for a position til a period of 12 months has past, so 2016 would be the first opportunity.

i don't think anyone resigning in say 2010 should be stopped from applying. anyway its pie in the sky as it was just a suggestion to try and add a bit of stability to the committee rather than people resiging after 9-10 months and then re-applying again 2-3 months after.

from what you've posted you seem to be suggesting that you want to apply again in the new few weeks for a position ??

also could you confirm that dave infact did resign and didn't have the vote put against him after refusing to sign dereks pre-written resignation .

You must ask Dave that question as im staying out of anything to do with that issue until the AGM

Regards me restanding , I have no plans to do so at all , But i have been asked to do so by many members ,

I would rather see a complete new committee ( apart from those who are still there now as they are all good at there role )

This IMO will sort all the issues between the obvious 2 sides of people who are fighting

None of the previous committee get back ( old or recent ) ,, problem solved

[i-am-the-peel]

Dave Easton , again was not thrown out

also could you confirm that dave infact did resign and didn't have the vote put against him after refusing to sign dereks pre-written resignation .

You must ask Dave that question as im staying out of anything to do with that issue until the AGM

paul you've already posted something that says he wasn't thrown out, all i was asking was confirmation of that incase something was lost in translation fair enough if you now don't want to get involved but it looks like you answered what i asked.

[NORTH YORKS RS SPARES]

paul you've already posted something that says he wasn't thrown out, all i was asking was confirmation of that incase something was lost in translation fair enough if you now don't want to get involved but it looks like you answered what i asked.

There was a statment made from Dave and one from the committee ( these have now been removed , but i printed them before hand )

I can only say that they should be challanged at the AGM and not on any websites

[i-am-the-peel]

There was a statment made from Dave and one from the committee ( these have now been removed , but i printed them before hand )

I can only say that they should be challanged at the AGM and not on any websites

i think there's been quite a few people screenshot most of whats been posted on the BB over the last few months paul, its a bit sad that its got to that point where people feel they have to print off posts and threads in preparation to have an arguement and question their colleagues integrity just to get to the truth of things, thats anything but open and transparent.

sounds like the AGM is going to be just like the board has been over the last few months then, which has done very little for the reputation of the club

its a bit late to suggest now that things shouldn't be challenged on websites as it been splashed all over the place for months now

[NORTH YORKS RS SPARES]

i think there's been quite a few people screenshot most of whats been posted on the BB over the last few months paul, its a bit sad that its got to that point where people feel they have to print off posts and threads in preparation to have an arguement and question their colleagues integrity just to get to the truth of things, thats anything but open and transparent.

sounds like the AGM is going to be just like the board has been over the last few months then, which has done very little for the reputation of the club

Lets hope peole are willing to say out in the open what they have said on the web then , I know i am very willing

Anyway , its about time we all had a life for a while and leave this for the AGM

[i-am-the-peel]

most people will probably stand up and say what they have to say paul but having a room full of people shouting and calling everyone around them liars and thieves isn't going to be productive lol

[NORTH YORKS RS SPARES]

most people will probably stand up and say what they have to say paul but having a room full of people shouting and calling everyone around them liars and thieves isn't going to be productive lol

There defo needs to be somone who keeps it on a level where everyone gets to say there bit , but it MUST be kept sivilised

I think the truth needs to be said , but i would like to think it can be done the correct way

[i-am-the-peel]

i like your optimism paul, but it hasn't been like that so far

and after seeing the way it was concucted last year, nobody had control of the room


'truth' is almost a four letter word

[Dave Easton]

What a can of worms !

I did not resign

I was told I had to leave and was sent my resignation letter, which I never agreed to did do a brief resignation
After a very heated debate with the chairman

He was not happy with the wording so I rescinded it and
Made my statement on the RSOC bb stating I had been asked to leave

Unfortunately there had been a big lack of communication in all of this
And most could have been sorted out with a few phone calls early on

Regards

Dave