mymerak wrote:
Hi
As a member of the national committee I cannot recall an instance when important matters have not been dealt with through discussion and voting of the committee. To me that seems like a proper and democratic way of dealing with matters on behalf of the club and its members
As far as Graham's comments are concerned he is basically correct
The structure of the club is a constitutional matter and covered specifically within the constitution of the club. It is not a matter for non members.
As far as the forum is concerned there is not a member of the committee who as ever voiced an opinion since I have been a member thereon, that it should be for members only. This differs from some forums as you well know.
On the contrary, the club committeee has been keen to support an open forum for all Porsche enthusiasts who are able to act and comment in a responsible manner. This has been in spite of recent problems of mass spamming
Comments regarding the constitution and the structure of the club are for the AGM or an EGM only; members only of course
If members do not like the manner in which the club is run, then they have two choices
One choice is to leave the club and the other choice is to deal with their dissatisfaction through the mechanisms embodied in the constitution. That sounds like a democracy to me
Hi
That sounds eminently sensible and well put....
The problem I had though was NOT " been dealt with through discussion and voting of the committee"
It was a unilateral decision ...
So I took your last sentence option..I left the club as your second choice of fighting it through the mechanisms of the constitution seemed a little unlikely to be a viable proposition as it was the Chairmans unilateral decision.....
I only fight battles I can win....so I left
And as I have said to many people, including the new RO - Nick ...I "would" rejoin happily....BUT not where the same thing CAN happen again.....and as nobody will promise me it wont...... etc etc
All the best Brett