This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Zac on 06 March 2010 - 15:03
Penny Wrote: >We thought this, but wondered if there was some way they could get around it. <
In a previous post you stated you were not trying to conspire against the committee and now you are trying to get around perfectly legitimate voting at the AGM........................What's all that about?
Sounds like sour grapes to me!
As I think I said earlier, the club does not belong to YOU!
by noddi on 06 March 2010 - 17:03
Zac,the THEY being refered to is birmingham and district committee,not hutch and penny.
by Penny on 06 March 2010 - 22:03
Zac Writes:
Whats all the fuss about? Those proposed new rules are present in most club constitutions. They are a safe guard to exactly the type of thing thats going off at the moment with the disgruntled ex committee.
We are not disgruntled - we are very concerned for the existence of a previously top GSD club going off to the black and whites with the obedience tickets only being left.
Here we go Zac - little explaination.
Whats the fuss about????? The breed and a club that has been looked after by top people in the past very well. The Johnnie Stokes of this land, Mike Wileman, Dr Malcolm Willis, all fought hard and long and worked hard and long to keep this club in its premiere state and caring about the correct GSD. Those people I have just mentioned could forget more than most of us would ever learn.... and now, this club is given over to people who only care about making mega money out of large obedience shows with all breeds. How on earth can they claim to be looking after the GSD in the UK.
Zac also writes
Sounds like sour grapes to me!
As I think I said earlier, the club does not belong to YOU!
Sour grapes? that is when you are jealous of something isnt it so you ridicule it? and not liking the fact that you are not doing what others are ? - we resigned particularly because we did not want to do what the others were doing - we had the choice and couldnt sell our GSD off like that. As far as the club not belonging to us - damn right it doesnt, or some of their large funds would be used up on members needs, equipment to train, and getting themselves out of the rut they are in. Nuff said Zac, you really dont understand yet everyone else seems to have no trouble understanding where Shirley and I were coming from. Mo.
by Penny on 06 March 2010 - 22:03
Zac wrote....
Anyone unhappy about their clubs? then there's a simple solution to that.............. vote out the committee and vote in one who you think can do better!
I was sure that this is what we were contemplating when the current committee care more about the dog they work - Collies - when faced with a magor decision about the future of our breed. When they voted and most of them shouldnt have had the vote, given that they were only associate members and in the rules they dont get a vote....... Mo
by missbeeb on 07 March 2010 - 07:03
The Club belongs to the GSD breed, Zac. Not Ob people working other breeds. I have no truck with Ob people, I worked my Shepherds in Ob... but a BREED Club should be governed by BREED people, Ob should be dealt with by a sub committee.
Why are YOU so angry with the breed people?
by Zac on 07 March 2010 - 17:03
To Missbeeb: The club belongs to its members .
Penny is right, I dont get it! I dont get why anyone would resign (of their own free will) because they wouldnt or didnt want to, sign up to CC show rules but now they are complaining that the tickets will be lost. Surely its been made more than clear that the tickets would be lost if clubs didnt sign up?
by hutch on 07 March 2010 - 23:03
I am actually quite impressed with the EC - they have never before been so coherent with their actions! It is just unfortunate that they are driven by a desire to run a Championship Obedience show rather than the primary objective of the Association - the betterment of the breed.
I know that many associations currently have a rule like the one being proposed - because BDGSDA relies on "pet" obedience members for a large chunk of its membership - it naturally has a pretty regular turnover of members with a few "core" long term members. I think this rule could make it difficult for them to be quorate at AGMs etc
Mum and I don't have a problem with letting go - we have so many other things that we want to do - but we are sad at the demise of what was once a great association.
Shirley
by Zac on 08 March 2010 - 12:03
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top