RE: What happens if MAAC folded?

RE: What happens if MAAC folded?
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> M.A.A.C. >> RE: What happens if MAAC folded? Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/14/2005 2:33:39 PM

Sharpy01

Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim_McIntyre

Sure, I enjoy the occasional loosly organized social funfly but, if all I was doing was poking holes in the sky, scarfing tube steaks and chats around the picnic tables, the BS/content ratio of these chats would soon exceed .....................

...............hey! Those are my favourite reasons for going!

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 76

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/14/2005 3:17:55 PM

DSLarkin

Posts: 136
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Picton, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

Wrong again Ken. I never ran for President, as you always claim: Ken Jones did. Do try and get something right. I was asked to run at the 97 AGM but declined as I was about to step down. Five years on the Board was more than enough. In 96, remember, most of the Board did nothing about the ACC problem, so they certainly weren't about to elect someone who did. It would have been too embarassing. The president they elected resigned Sep 1st, effective Sep 15th.

As Chad says, the FAI has been running events for high performance electrics, probably since the early 90s. Not pattern but climb and glide and pylon if memory serves aright. Developments from this have spilled over elsewhere.

But one has to be fair and recognize the achievements of outstanding modellers like Dr Keith Shaw who showed just what could be done with electrics in sport and scale aircraft.

Did you jump or were you pushed? I was told you jumped, citing 'family reasons'. Was there or was there not an EGM coming your way in Manitoba? Jeff Helps would know, so would Cliff Swartz. Or Frank Hummell.

That's enough for this thread. It's getting like a broken record.

(in reply to can773)

Post #: 77

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/14/2005 5:25:01 PM

kenair

Posts: 492
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: winnipeg, MB, CANADA
Status: offline

Mention my resignation or quiting is fine, mention your rejection by the board and now the thread is broken.
ok, you did not run for prez but you did run for vp and the executive seat and was soundly rejected by your peers, and you did not mention that.

Sunday evening after the maac agm, Ray Brosinsky AB zone rep apologized to Rick Reid for voting with you on the acc, he admitted to Rick Reid that he made a mistake voting with you, I witnessed the apology.

The next year the SK and Quebec zone reps did not run and Louis Lebel resigned because the underhanded politcs introduced.

Rick Reid and the board was working to resolve the ACC issue, you were not getting your way, so you took matters outside the board.
You broke the main rules of democratic governance, there is a process in maac that you could have followed.

As a result political turmoil has been a part of maac since then.

< Message edited by kenair -- 9/14/2005 5:29:11 PM >

_____________________________

[link]http://www.upaero.com/[/link]

(in reply to DSLarkin)

Post #: 78

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/14/2005 6:26:53 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kenair
As a result political turmoil has been a part of maac since then.

Political turmoil?

All I see is a couple reality-challenged malcontents posting conspiracy theories all over the net.

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to kenair)

Post #: 79

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/14/2005 8:34:58 PM

DSLarkin

Posts: 136
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Picton, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

Ken,

You are at it again. I did run for VP at Ken Jones' request. But neither he nor I were ever going to be elected as we had only a couple of supporters. As I said, the rest of the Board (except Ray) and all the Executive sat on their hands and did nothing at all to work out the ACC difficulty so they didn't like me for doing what I had to do. You could cut the hostility with a knife. Running for Executive is automatic - in MAAC elections if you aren't elected for one job they put you up for the next job.

There was nothing underhanded in what I did, and the Board was kept informed. It may have looked underhanded to you but all that was required was developing a working relationship with the other ACC associations, getting their ideas, and working together on a solution. In essence - commonplace staff work. Pulling MAAC out of the ACC was a destructive measure and was never going to achieve anything. Rick simply didn't do his spadework. He showed up at meetings wthemselves didn't have a mandate to make the right decisions. Had he talked to the other association presidents ahead of time he might very well have been able to come up with something. Of course, as always. personalities do come into it and you have to work around this. Similarly it was surprising how few of the ACC association presidents really understood the existing fee structure. Once we all understood the real situation, and got rid of quite a few myths, we found it easy to work together.

I have Louis Lebel's resignation letter in front of me. Nothing about your mythical 'underhanded politics'. He simply says that he can't function without the support of the Board and that it is clear that a majority of the Board didn't support his views. In other words almost everybody was out of step but him. Do try to stay away from fiction. In a Board-centred organisation the job of the President and Executive is to follow the Board's direction. He didn't want to do that so he, very correctly, resigned. I don't think he was ever comfortable in the job. He had two meetings over which to preside and in each case he gave up the job to someone else. He is to be commended for recognising that he was in an untenable situation and for not dragging it out. In fairness, the Board should never have put him in a situation for which he wasn't best suited. But he happened to be VP and I think the Board members felt it was only polite to elect him, particularly as he was hosting the AGM in Montreal. A bit more thought would have been helpful. Quite apart from Ken and myself, and we were never going to be considered seriously, there were others well worth considering. I certainly would have been delighted to vote for Marcel Lahaie and Eldon showed us that he could do a good job.

(in reply to kenair)

Post #: 80

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/14/2005 9:34:05 PM

Sharpy01

Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

......ah, Dave, you may want to take your own advice and let this go as the pretentious and arrogant tone of your postings is flaring and becoming somewhat contradictory?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DSLarkin

I did run for VP at Ken Jones' request. But neither he nor I were ever going to be elected as we had only a couple of supporters. As I said, the rest of the Board (except Ray) and all the Executive sat on their hands and did nothing at all to work out the ACC difficulty so they didn't like me for doing what I had to do. You could cut the hostility with a knife.

We have been left with the impression that you had the board's full support for your actions?

It would appear that only those who agree with you are capable/qualified to be board members.

< Message edited by Sharpy01 -- 9/14/2005 10:10:28 PM >

(in reply to DSLarkin)

Post #: 81

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/15/2005 1:43:35 AM

Morison

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/3/2005
From: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim_McIntyre

quote:

ORIGINAL: kenair
Prior to this, has a maac sponsored world championship lost $60K....

Here we go again .... should we talk about a certain Nats in your zone that lost a pile of money too?

If you want to - be aware that the board of directors mandated the 'extra' spending on the Brandon Nationals and were fuilly aware that the event would run a deficit. The losses were mostly attributed to the concept of having team trials at the Nats, and the resulting costs of bringing in the CD's and / or committee chairs to oversee the trials. It was an active decision to spend money to try and make the Nats a 'show' ... it didn't work.
Tough to compare that to an event that showed a break even budget right up to the last minute and fell short on revenue by a significant margin. (I've heard rumours that the loss was predicted to be ~60,000 over two years before the event happened) MAAC was never given the chance to decide to spend the money on Scale WC 2002.

_____________________________

Keith Morison
Publisher

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 82

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/15/2005 1:22:53 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

That's one take on both events.... I'll spare you my observations as my point was (and still is) this has all been discussed ad nauseum on other boards ... I really don't want to go down that road again.

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to Morison)

Post #: 83

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/15/2005 7:27:33 PM

Morison

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/3/2005
From: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Status: offline

Jim,
with all due respect, you pointed your finger at the Brandon Nats. The FACT is that the expediatures associated with it were mandated and somewhat expected by the board - for the most part. (forget about peoples takes on teh events - I was part of the organisng committee) The shortfalls at the Scale W/Champs were neither expected (officially) nor mandated (also forget about takes on events, I was at board meetings where these things were discussed) ... there is a HUGE difference intelectually.

I don't particularly want to see either event dragged through the mud any more. I'd love to see Canada stick up its hand to host another W/Champs again ... remember that the last one we held raised about $8K for future F3J teams!

< Message edited by Morison -- 9/15/2005 7:29:19 PM >

_____________________________

Keith Morison
Publisher

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 84

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/15/2005 8:53:16 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Morison
I don't particularly want to see either event dragged through the mud any more. I'd love to see Canada stick up its hand to host another W/Champs again ...

Exactly my point.

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to Morison)

Post #: 85

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/16/2005 2:50:41 AM

DSLarkin

Posts: 136
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Picton, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

Keith,

The Board was always assured, as far as I can recollect, that the Brandon Nats would pay for themselves. So for the Board, the loss was a shock. The Executive may well have known otherwise, somebody had to authorize the extra expenditure. I was told that it had been thought necessary to offer free MAAC memberships to 'volunteers'.

If the losses were largely caused by the Board's mistaken concept of running the team trials at the Nats (against the advice from the Committees, and we have committees to provide expert advice) then it is fair to blame the Board. However it was naughty of the MAAC leadership to try and bury the entire loss in the financial report as 'FAI expense'.

There is one useful lesson to learn from both events and that is that serious competition events are not necessarily going to excel as a magnet for spectators, and organizers (and the MAAC Board) should not rely on this to offset costs.

Another error made by the Board was that it would be no problem to move the Nats around the country. This was a well-meant but shaky idea, ignoring the difficuties of finding and training volunteers (that's why the Summerside Nats never happened). And there are inevitable start-up costs from using a new location.

Sometimes wishful thinking gets in the way. The Brandon organizers were sure that they had exclusive use of the airport - others pointed out that there were scheduled airline movements which could not and would not be cancelled, and they were right. For the St Jean Nats, the politicians assured the organizers that the airport would be available, and were believed. In DND we knew that the Air Cadets had a contract to use the field, and that's how it played out. In neither case did the organizers listen to advice. To be fair, in both cases alternative sites were found and the events went on, albeit probably at extra cost and less income.

But let's not lose sight of the fact that a lot of people worked hard to make these events memorable, and that they were enjoyed by those who participated. There are lessons to be learned, and indeed some of them didn't need to have been repeated, but lets not join the ranks of those who make a career out of attacking anyone who tries to run an event. And micro-managing the book-keeping is not going to prevent a cost over-run caused by a fundamental error or errors.

(in reply to Morison)

Post #: 86

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/16/2005 4:48:53 AM

Sharpy01

Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DSLarkin

There are lessons to be learned, and indeed some of them didn't need to have been repeated, but lets not join the ranks of those who make a career out of attacking anyone who tries to run an event. And micro-managing the book-keeping is not going to prevent a cost over-run caused by a fundamental error or errors.

Correct.

However, if those who organize such events refuse to accept that mistakes were made and provide detailed reports as to where those mistakes were made..................how do we learn?

.........and if folks like yourself, who lable folks like me who ask the tough questions as "anti-competition" and suggest that asking such questions are the work of career attackers? Where do we go Dave? I did my darndest to try and avoid repeated and obvious organizational problems for the latest big event loss. Yet, you chose to marginalize any inquiry I made from the beginning as "ant-FAI/Competition" and continue to tag along on that bandwagon whenever a related topic flares.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DSLarkin
There is one useful lesson to learn from both events and that is that serious competition events are not necessarily going to excel as a magnet for spectators, and organizers (and the MAAC Board) should not rely on this to offset costs.

.........that is almost a direct quote from the very first question I asked in relation to World Scale? It boggles why my questions related to this FAI event cast me as a villan when you apparently shared the same view?

It's political mumbo-jumbo Dave. You and a few others seen me as a threat to what you consider sacred(and apparently still do) and it didn't/doesn't matter what I was actually saying/said.........................only, who I was saying it to and the type of event it related to. You mercilessly pass judgement on those whom have dared to challenge anything and anyone related to the FAI. Those left in that wake include Rick Reid, Ken Kalynuk, Louis Label, Marc Sharpe, Wayne Bransfield and apparently many of your fellow board members when you served.

I actually respect your passion and tenacity, but you really shouldn't try to set yourself as some form of unbiased voice of reason...........because you are not.

< Message edited by Sharpy01 -- 9/16/2005 5:01:35 AM >

(in reply to DSLarkin)

Post #: 87

RE: What happens if MAAC folded? - 9/16/2005 6:47:54 AM

Morison

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/3/2005
From: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Status: offline

Dave, PLEASE don't make me side with Ken ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: DSLarkin
The Board was always assured, as far as I can recollect, that the Brandon Nats would pay for themselves. So for the Board, the loss was a shock.

Completely untrue. Discussions were that if the costs of bringing in committee chairs or event CDs was to be assumed by the nationals it would never make money - which was widely understood. Chairs or CDs travel and accomodation costs were covered simply because if you are going to tell people where thy have to have their trials, then you have to cover their costs of going there (morally.)

Losses also came from the fact that most competitors who travelled to brandon for FAI trials chose to boycot the nats (some were really rude about it too) after the local orgnisers bent over backwards to accomodate them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DSLarkin
If the losses were largely caused by the Board's mistaken concept of running the team trials at the Nats (against the advice from the Committees, and we have committees to provide expert advice) then it is fair to blame the Board. However it was naughty of the MAAC leadership to try and bury the entire loss in the financial report as 'FAI expense'.

Oddly, I completely disagree that mandating the Trials at the nats is wrong ... there is VERY solid foundation for the concept.
The idea of the Nats is to bring the best in each discipline to one place to see who is the best in Canada... the idea of a team trials is to bring the best in each discipline to one place to see who is the best in Canada ...
You can either do this twice in a year in two locations or do it once at the Nationals.
Should the expenses have been 'hidden' in theFAI line ... probably not.
Should unusually large variences in a budget be noted with an explanation in budgets and financial reports? yes

quote:

ORIGINAL: DSLarkin] There is one useful lesson to learn from both events and that is that serious competition events are not necessarily going to excel as a magnet for spectators, and organizers (and the MAAC Board) should not rely on this to offset costs.

Bingo

quote:

ORIGINAL: DSLarkin]The Brandon organizers were sure that they had exclusive use of the airport - others pointed out that there were scheduled airline movements which could not and would not be cancelled, and they were ri