NABO

[mayalld]

I was being flippant in response to Dave's attack.... sorry. He seems to think that I want to be PR rep as some sort of ego trip. Not so. I'm willing to give up my time to try to help Nabo improve it's image, but if they were to take Dave's advice based on his personal opinion of me, and not ask me to be PR rep, then I would gladly concentrate on boating instead, like most other folks.

 

Tone

 

[edited for inappropriate content]

 

If it is your intention to leave NONE of my post, then delete the thing, rather than indulging in yet more public grandstanding about your moderating.

 

However, I stand by what I said.

 

There is a suggestion that Tony Hayes might be appointed to an official position withing NABO. I consider it fair comment to point out that his past history on PR matters makes him singularly unsuited to the role.

Edited March 10, 2011 by mayalld

[David Schweizer]

Not at all. I asked the question. Thanks for the feed back. It is an interesting idea. I can put it to council and see if we could put it to the membership. It is the sort of constructive suggestion I have been asking for.

 

Tone

Well how about a further suggestion. That Regional Representatives be elected by members either resident or with a mooring (member's choice) in the region, and that Regional Representatives be required to consult(via the internet) on forthcoming Agenda items with members in their region, and use the results of that consultation to determine how they vote on the matter.

[canaldrifter]

Well how about a further suggestion. That Regional Representatives be elected by members either resident or with a mooring (member's choice) in the region, and that Regional Representatives be required to consult(via the internet) on forthcoming Agenda items with members in their region, and use the results of that consultation to determine how they vote on the matter.

 

May I pass on your post verbatim?

 

Tone

[sociable_hermit]

And that is the problem with NABO.

 

Anybody who dares to criticise the politburo has their opinion discounted.

 

In consequence, the entire membership whose opinion is counted agrees with the council.

And I seem to remember that's exactly why Tone fell out with SOW, something he's brought up again recently.

 

I'm not saying that to be nasty, I'm pointing it out so the people involved can understand exactly why the majority of prospective members (it would appear) aren't very happy with the present NABO set up.

[David Schweizer]

May I pass on your post verbatim?

 

Tone

Yes, With pleasure.

[sociable_hermit]

Well how about a further suggestion. That Regional Representatives be elected by members either resident or with a mooring (member's choice) in the region, and that Regional Representatives be required to consult(via the internet) on forthcoming Agenda items with members in their region, and use the results of that consultation to determine how they vote on the matter.

I think that will end up creating a huge amount of bureaucracy, and would also be discriminatory against those without a PC.

 

Voting on anything and everything is just too time-consuming for a volunteer-led organisation. Far better to give the boaters a choice of regional reps to vote for, and then let them select the one who best represents their views, and/or has skills which are felt to be desirable for the organisation as a whole. Make the term length, say, 2 years, so they don't forget who put them there, and off they go. By all means have regular regional meetings and online discussions, but I'd avoid having votes on every single agenda item every month.

 

P.S. I'd also say the 'rank and file' should be able to suggest additional agenda items for their Rep to take to Council, rather than simply discussing what's already been proposed for discussion by the Council!

Edited March 9, 2011 by sociable_hermit

[cotswoldsman]

Yes, With pleasure.

 

I think you just re invented the wheel!!!!!!

[sociable_hermit]

I further propose that regional meetings should be held in different waterways related locations around each region, but ALWAYS in a pub.

 

Sure fire way to increase attendence.

[David Schweizer]

I think that will end up creating a huge amount of bureaucracy, and would also be discriminatory against those without a PC.

 

Voting on anything and everything is just too time-consuming for a volunteer-led organisation. Far better to give the boaters a choice of regional reps to vote for, and then let them select the one who best represents their views, and/or has skills which are felt to be desirable for the organisation as a whole. Make the term length, say, 2 years, so they don't forget who put them there, and off they go. By all means have regular regional meetings and online discussions, but I'd avoid having votes on every single agenda item every month.

But what is the point of appointing representatives on a regional basis if there is no mechanism for them to engage with the members who appointed them?

 

I do not understand your statement that voting on everything is too time consuming. I am not suggesting that day to day matters be subjected to continuous consultation, but the Council already vote on major issues. What I am suggesting is a mechanism for the Regional Representatives vote to be informed. If the rank and file membership feel engaged with the decision making process, they will demostrate much more enthusiasm for supporting any decisions made on their behalf.

[FadeToScarlet]

But that is the essential point about Representaional Democracy. At least we all had the chance of voting for them, without having to attend a meeting half way across the Country. If NABO introduced a system which permitted members to either vote on line, or by post, the elected Council members could claim to have a mandate to represent us, but that seems far too radical a concept for our Tone to comprehend.

 

I agree on this idea. I'm a committee member of my local community association for residential boaters, and my biggest fear is misrepresenting the position of most members. It would be very easy for me to present my opinion as that of the organisation, and so the committee members try and publicise their meetings- normally holding them in a pub!- and consult members via an online messageboard. If you look back at www.camboaters.co.uk you'll see that the members co-operated and had input to things done on their behalf, such as letters being sent to the navigation authority. A newsletter containing the minutes of meetings, contact details for all the committee, and the venue and time of the next meeting are circulated. It's not perfect, but the opportunity to input is available and used, and the discussion and decisions are transparent to all.

 

Another local organisation, GOBA, has an online forum to allow members to express their point of view.

 

As a prospective member of NABO, I would be put off by the difficulty of communicating my opinion. I could email a Council member, but there's no way of knowing what other people think- and that council member could recieve hundreds of emails on a contentious topic, whereas a simple online poll, say, could reduce the workload considerably.

 

Modern technology has made it far easier to.communicate and share ideas and points of view. It seems very Luddite to ignore the possibilities. Things have moved on considerably since Rolt and Aickman wrote many, many letters back and forth to each other....

[Midnight Rider]

[Does my opinion have more weight than Carl's? I am (until the SO doesn't get paid at the next renewal) still a member of NABO]

Yes, I am in the same position, having been a member for 5 years.

 

I have no wish to give you any more grief Tone, but stop digging now.

 

I would echo the suggestions of using the internet to give NABO members some input. It should not be necessary to have actual meetings very often, unless you are treating them as a social gathering.

 

As for this thread being good for NABO as the number of views increase, don't count on it. It hasn't encouraged me to return.

 

Tony

[ymu]

Reducing everything to a vote is kind of missing the point. Voting means someone else deciding what options you're allowed to vote for - which is why representative democracy is so easy to subvert into an elected dictatorship.

 

Having the chance to have some input, find out what other people think, volunteer on an ad hoc basis is much more important. And much more useful to the organisation. If, for example, BW decided to triple the licence fee for wooden boats on the grounds that they keep sinking, you might want someone like Carl to enter the discussion, and quite possibly have someone like Carl offer to lead on a NABO response.

 

That doesn't mean Carl would do the same thing when marina connection fees are the issue - it just means NABO got the best person for that particular job, the discussion took place in an open forum and deepened everyone's understanding of the issues, the membership felt involved because they were involved, and can see how they could use their own areas of expertise/enthusiasm to move the organisation forward.

 

It's not enough to want people to get more involved. You have to make it possible, and rewarding, for them to do so.

[sociable_hermit]

But what is the point of appointing representatives on a regional basis if there is no mechanism for them to engage with the members who appointed them?

 

I do not understand your statement that voting on everything is too time consuming. I am not suggesting that day to day matters be subjected to continuous consultation, but the Council already vote on major issues. What I am suggesting is a mechanism for the Regional Representatives vote to be informed. If the rank and file membership feel engaged with the decision making process, they will demostrate much more enthusiasm for supporting any decisions made on their behalf.

I agree entirely with your sentiments, I'm just trying to make it simple to operate.

 

The reason politicians get away with misrepresenting their voters, and considering themselves more important, is that they are distanced from their electorate. With this idea of NABO regional reps, what I'm saying is I think the regions should be smaller, and each elected rep should hold a meeting once a month at a different boaty location within their area, and in a boozer. There, anyone would be able to have a say. You can add e-mails, phone calls, towpath discussions and internet forums to the channels of communication if you like. But voting by all these means, in order to make things truly fair, would be a nightmare to administer. So don't bother. Leave it up to the Rep to get a feel for the issues from their group and take them forward.

 

If they don't seem to be representing the membership properly, you can (collectively) have a word at the next meeting. Holding meetings like these in pubs always adds a certain alcoholic volatility to proceedings, which encourages those in charge to tread a cautious path. But if all else fails, you can always vote somebody else in next time round, or stand for election yourself. But I reckon direct contact with the membership on a regular basis should be enough to prevent any complacency, when coupled with bi-annual elections.

 

It should not be necessary to have actual meetings very often, unless you are treating them as a social gathering.

I think they should be - it builds cameraderie. WRG have got this right.

 

It's also useful to have a time and a place set, every month, to get people to focus their thoughts. Otherwise you're dealing with lots of unrelated bits and pieces of information all the time, plus many people will never get round to doing anything if left to their own devices. Set a date, and they will, cos they've got something to aim for.

[Midnight Rider]

I think they should be - it builds cameraderie. WRG have got this right.

 

It's also useful to have a time and a place set, every month, to get people to focus their thoughts. Otherwise you're dealing with lots of unrelated bits and pieces of information all the time, plus many people will never get round to doing anything if left to their own devices. Set a date, and they will, cos they've got something to aim for.

Yes, fine Tom but we are talking about boaters. During the summer months you will probably have a couple of members moaning to each other while everyone else are away. Use a members forum to get the views & keep the meetings to a minimum imho.

 

Tony

[sociable_hermit]

Yes, fine Tom but we are talking about boaters. During the summer months you will probably have a couple of members moaning to each other while everyone else are away. Use a members forum to get the views & keep the meetings to a minimum imho.

 

Tony

I think you need to do both.

 

I disagree that NABO members wouldn't turn up, if they knew there was a meeting. CWDF members turn up every time there's a banter, what's the difference? If you are on tour, it's something to aim for if you're in the area.

 

I agree that the net is a useful tool, but it doesn't cover everyone by any means. Not on land, and certainly not on boats. CWDF isn't a representative group for boaters by any means, so I don't think forums are an answer in isolation. Useful, yes, democratic, no. There's an awful lot of people would be left out if you relied on forums completely.

Edited March 9, 2011 by sociable_hermit

[Midnight Rider]

I think you need to do both.

That's what I said.

 

There's an awful lot of people would be left out if you relied on forums completely.

That's what I did't say.

[sociable_hermit]

I'm confused now. What you've just written doesn't tally with:

"Use a members forum to get the views & keep the meetings to a minimum imho."

 

The point I was making is that you can't use a forum to "get the views" instead of having meetings, because they appeal to different elements of the boating world. Both are equally necessary.

 

However it seems we are now in agreement?

[Innkeeper]

I am very encouraged that at some point during this evening the comments become balanced and quite sensible - well done!

 

We are very conscious that there are many things about our attempts at publicity that can improve and some of the more sensible ones aired here in the past few days will be looked at and hopefully acted upon. I would however just like to say that most of the critism we seem to be getting is from non members who seem to have long term grievances and much of the comments that have been made about how we have run ourselves for the past 21 years are a bit unfair. Pretty much all we do is actually fully available to members including minutes of meetings at any time. I receive an average of a dozen communications from members through the web site every week on a variety of subjects but as has been muted before we are all doing this as enthusiasts and there are only so many hours per week that we can give to it!

 

I also feel that casual readers of the topic will have been bemused by some of the silly stuff between a very limited number of contributors, its certainly one reason why I dont feel inclined to get involved with comment happy that as I am directly involved and know the facts we are as democratic as we can be, as dedicated as we can be and a pretty good cross section of Boat Owners to boot. We do have the ear of the powers that be and do our best to represent as many views as we can from boat owners. Oh and we do carry out various surveys of our members both on ,line and by questionnaires, to make sure what we say has a consensus.

 

Oh, a couple of other things that have been aired - I must admit, when I moved from a member to be getting more involved I found the use of the term Council a bit odd but thats what the people who formed NABO decided 21 years ago so thats what we are - think it might have been to distinguish themselves from IWA Trustees for it was a breakaway from there at the time I think. Anyway does it really matter except to those that want to have a bit of a sly dig?

 

So at our meeting this weekend all those of you who are not members will be happy to know that some of the sensible comments aired here in the past few days will be discussed and are on the agenda and like everything else the decisions made will be communicated on the site and in the next newsletter. Sadly though not here unless it is deemed we need our PR person and he or she decides to come here. Also on the agenda will be the annoying announcement on the Lee and Stort moorings policy which appears to have been done without any consultation, Visitor Mooring policies in general and our reaction to all Consultees being ignored on the subject of licence charges, in particular the hideous imbalance for short term licenses. We will continue to discuss our "Ultra Vires" actions and receive reports from members who have attended various meetings concerning the direction the NWC will take, how the hell the new Trustees expect the system to be run on the limited funding models being proposed and with the reliance on volunteering from a very sceptical boating fraternity.

 

And yes, just in case anyone reads this that doesn't know, I am this years Hon Gen Sec of NABO!

Edited March 10, 2011 by Innkeeper

[David Schweizer]

I agree entirely with your sentiments, I'm just trying to make it simple to operate.

 

The reason politicians get away with misrepresenting their voters, and considering themselves more important, is that they are distanced from their electorate. With this idea of NABO regional reps, what I'm saying is I think the regions should be smaller, and each elected rep should hold a meeting once a month at a different boaty location within their area, and in a boozer. There, anyone would be able to have a say. You can add e-mails, phone calls, towpath discussions and internet forums to the channels of communication if you like. But voting by all these means, in order to make things truly fair, would be a nightmare to administer. So don't bother. Leave it up to the Rep to get a feel for the issues from their group and take them forward.

 

If they don't seem to be representing the membership properly, you can (collectively) have a word at the next meeting. Holding meetings like these in pubs always adds a certain alcoholic volatility to proceedings, which encourages those in charge to tread a cautious path. But if all else fails, you can always vote somebody else in next time round, or stand for election yourself. But I reckon direct contact with the membership on a regular basis should be enough to prevent any complacency, when coupled with bi-annual elections.

 

 

I think they should be - it builds cameraderie. WRG have got this right.

 

It's also useful to have a time and a place set, every month, to get people to focus their thoughts. Otherwise you're dealing with lots of unrelated bits and pieces of information all the time, plus many people will never get round to doing anything if left to their own devices. Set a date, and they will, cos they've got something to aim for.

It would appear that we are basicly in agreement about the need for NABO to make it's policy making process more transparent and accessible to members, and am quite happy with the suggestion that they have regular Regional meetings as a means of communication, but would still like to see the alternatives of letter or internet acess retained for those unable to attend.

Edited March 10, 2011 by David Schweizer

[Albion]

I think you need to do both.

 

I disagree that NABO members wouldn't turn up, if they knew there was a meeting. CWDF members turn up every time there's a banter, what's the difference? If you are on tour, it's something to aim for if you're in the area.

 

I agree that the net is a useful tool, but it doesn't cover everyone by any means. Not on land, and certainly not on boats. CWDF isn't a representative group for boaters by any means, so I don't think forums are an answer in isolation. Useful, yes, democratic, no. There's an awful lot of people would be left out if you relied on forums completely.

 

In all honesty if you take the numbers who turn up at a banter as a percentage of the over 10,000 registered on this forum I suspect that the figure would actually be very low. If you then extrapolate this low percentage to the membership of NABO the actual turnout would be very small. It's just a fact of any organisation's life. I think the idea of a NABO on-line forum to thrash out ideas in advance that can, subsequently, be taken to any physical meeting that is held is still the way to go as you will involve the max number of members. Pigeon lofts could be provided for those still using birds to carry their mail.

Roger

[canaldrifter]

[edited for inappropriate content]

 

If it is your intention to leave NONE of my post, then delete the thing, rather than indulging in yet more public grandstanding about your moderating.

 

However, I stand by what I said.

 

There is a suggestion that Tony Hayes might be appointed to an official position withing NABO. I consider it fair comment to point out that his past history on PR matters makes him singularly unsuited to the role.

 

Your continuing aggressive public personal vendetta against me is noted. I am assured that it is harming your reputation far more than it is mine.

 

Tone

 

I further propose that regional meetings should be held in different waterways related locations around each region, but ALWAYS in a pub.

 

Sure fire way to increase attendence.

 

Council meetings are held in a real ale pub!

 

Tone

[Hairy-Neil]

Your continuing aggressive public personal vendetta against me is noted. I am assured that it is harming your reputation far more than it is mine.

 

Tone

 

I'd have said it was boosting Mayalld's reputation rather than harming it.....

[canaldrifter]

Having re-read this thread today, and gleaned from it useful suggestions, I would just like to personally thank those who have taken the trouble to make a positive input.

 

As an active member, I intend to summarise the suggestions made in a short article and submit them to the editor of Nabo News. I think Innkeeper will be raising them at the council meeting on Saturday, but my concern is that there are many Nabo members who are not online and many who are but do not read this forum, who may wish to make their own comments too.

 

Without using names in the piece I would like to quote Albion, David Schweizer, sociable_hermit, FadeToScarlet, ymu and Midnight Rider. David has already given permission, but if any of the others have objections could they let me know, either here or by PM?

 

cheers

 

Tone

[Albion]

 

Without using names in the piece I would like to quote Albion, David Schweizer, sociable_hermit, FadeToScarlet, ymu and Midnight Rider. David has already given permission, but if any of the others have objections could they let me know, either here or by PM?

 

cheers

 

Tone

 

I have no objection to my suggested changes/improvements being put before your committee. I will declare again though that I have no past or present connection with NABO and no intention of joining as I no longer boat in this country. If you are happy to put forward my totally independent view/s then you are welcome if you think it will help.

Roger

[carlt]

 

Without using names in the piece I would like to quote Albion, David Schweizer, sociable_hermit, FadeToScarlet, ymu and Midnight Rider. David has already given permission, but if any of the others have objections could they let me know, either here or by PM?

 

Interesting that you started a thread, in response to comments made by me, yet you won't even be quoting the original protagonist, in your ground breaking article.

 

I feel distinctly snubbed (yet strangely flattered )

Edited March 10, 2011 by carlt