Jim_McIntyre

More likely my selective source of information, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.
The fact remains, your credibility, motives and 'modus operandi' remain in question....


Your "track" may be about traffic, but I think there is a broader issue of greater importance:
I am not a fan of having M.A.A.C. (notice correct spelling as I am not concerned about legal ramifications since I have no hostile intent) being dragged through the mud with implications and spin doctoring.[>:]

----------------------

I though we had "wiped the slate clean" in a previous thread on this forum, it's sad how easily we slip back into old roles.[]

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

We're human Jim. We both suck at times. I can accept that we disagree on politics, but it does not prevent us from discussing toy planes. Hell, I'd still share a beer (or coffee) some time and swap plane BS with you. Personally, I think you have listened way too much to a few individuals who took everything I said or done from day one as some kind of personal insult. Too bad for them. It's time they got over it.

As for my credibility, rest assured that is intact. Motives and MO are simply to educate the silent and apathetic majority and expose some of the BS and underbelly of an organization that has functioned unquestioned for too many years............thus the "MAAK" poke as it's a play on spelling relating to old soviet style politics..............a little poke, that's all. [8D]

Jim_McIntyre

Fair enough, things are not always as they seem.

My main beef is with your apparent attempts to make things seem much worse than they are, I fail to see any evidence of "cloak and dagger" shenanigans or "old boys club" behaviours, and yes, I have attended executive meetings (as an observer).

The sky is not falling, nor is MAAC a front for some dark, devious goings on. When things do go wrong, I think it's more a direct result of the fact that MAAC relies heavily on volunteers and as a result suffers in terms of quality, continuity and follow-through as a result.

britbrat

True enough, but that shouldn't exempt MAAC & its policies & endeavors from criticism. Like any other enterprise, MAAC won't get better, or learn from its experiences unless it is subject to critical review, & if necessary, forced accountability.

The stiffling of criticism may not emmanate directly from MAAC -- but it may be directed, suggested, or encouraged by certain individuals within MAAC. That is not in MAAC's best interest as an organization, & certainly not in the membership's best interest.

Everyone has the right to personal opinions, including those about MAAC, be they positive or negative. As members of this forum they also have the right to express those opinions, within the behavioural boundaries established by RCU. That is not the case in all RC forums that deal with MAAC issues. One can agree or disagree with posted opinions, and one can even be embarassed by expressed opinions, but to attempt to eliminate the right to express particular opinions is very low and unworthy behaviour. It runs contrary to the most basic democratic principles and is a fundamentally destructive activity.

Leave the forum alone. RCU can handle its own business quite nicely.

Jim_McIntyre

I will be the first to defend the freedom of speech, but that freedom carries responsibility.

The simple fact is that this is not RCU business that is being discussed, it is MAAC's business.

I would think MAAC should have some say about how how they are represented. We are MAAC and, as a MAAC member, I find some of the accusations and innuendo highly offensive.

Not only does it discredit the efforts of some very hard working volunteers ( which leads to even fewer people coming forward as volunteers ) but, it does very serious public relations damage.[>:]

You may think you are "making a difference" well, you are. Unfortunately it's not necessarily the kind of impact you may be intending to make (or maybe it is?).

The AMA forums are a good model for this impact. Go read them, then tell me your overall impression with AMA, keeping in mind, if you were a newbie investigating the hobbie, would you want to join such an organization? Now visit the AMA website with the same intentions .... see any difference?

No MAAC may not be perfect (what organization is?) but, there are methods built into the organization for dealing with issues....

What do you really expect to resolve by endless fingerpointing and character assasinations?

Use this forum for contributing positive ideas instead of criticism and we may effect positive change.
Use it for sniping, and we will continue to argue ad nauseum until we all tire of the same old arguments....

britbrat

So where is the finger pointing & accusations?

I'm a MAAC member too & I want the organization to survive -- it's in our best interest as modellers, but perhaps not everyone has the same agenda as I do. I want a clean, transparent and accountable organization that considers critical review a necessary part of doing business.

I'm not accusing anyone specific of trying to close this forum, or suppress freedom of expression -- but someone is trying to do it. This forum has a substantial number of MAAC members -- members who have every right to discuss MAAC business here. RCU is simply the host & has no vested interest in the activity, other than it is activity that increases it's membership.

If you are offended by discussion of MAAC (or AMA) business, don't read it -- and don't try to stop others from reading it.

Jim_McIntyre

One need not read far to find it ....

Provide me with an example of such an organization and we'll use that as a model to rebuild MAAC.....

[monty pyton-esque]help, I'm being repressed! [/monty python-esque]

I am offended and will continue to defend my position, than you very much. [sm=tongue.gif]

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

Perhaps we agree after all on some politics. I don't believe there are "dark goings on", but more an issue of conflicting personalities and different priorities and a "few" who border on fanaticism while trying to protect the status quo.

Believe it or not, my entry into the political arena was quite innocent and maybe even interesting?

In 92, I transferred to a wee place that bordered the USA and hunted down a RC pilot in the area to help me learn the hobby I had desperately wanted to become involved in since I was a kid. As it turned out, the only active modeller was in the US and I began flying there. I was told I needed insurance and because we flew in the US, I was introduced to the AMA and the fledgling SFA. I chose the SFA because it was cheaper. New of MAAC, but assumed it was no good on the US side. (didn't know better)

Eventually found a vacant field on our side and started a club, learned the rules of MAAC and chartered. (Insurance reasons were my only interest) It's only been a dozen years, but the internet was in it's infantcy when a began flying and one night stumbled upon RConline. Thought it was neat to be able to talk to other modellers while quite isolated from most and figured out how to use a fledgling forum freebe site to start up the first Canadian dedicated R/C discussion forum. Pretty crude, but I lay claim to the first national site thanks to an wayward email from a national R/C Distributor that had all their customer emails attached. Remember, this was some time ago and I didn't even know what "SPAM" was. Regardless, I used the data base to send out the message that the forum existed and managed a modest membership from various parts of the country.

Not being a political animal, I had no idea that there was a sport vs competition tug-of-war going on within the organization. As you may have guessed, that didn't last for long. Quite frankly, I found the us vs them junk entertaining because it had little effect on what I was doing.

this is where things changed...........

At some point, I began asking questions as to budget numbers and where the membership money was spent. I had assumed that most went to insurance, which most know now to not be the case. Now curious, I began trying to find out where to obtain actual numbers and raising questions as to why the distribution of membeship money was the way it was. ...............

It wasn't long before a familiar core of folks appeared on the forum with rather angry and arrogant tones suggesting that the site was there only to "bash" MAAK and that the internet was no place to discuss the business of MAAK and that we should stop discussing issues and (here's the kicker) ..............if I wanted to get the real story and learn, then get involved, go to the zone meeting and find out what it's all about.

............well, their attitude and attacking demenour for asking what I thought were pretty valid questions, motivated me to take their advice and playing by the rules of the association, I was soon representing the zone and on the board right in the thick of more than I could have imagined was possible in the world of toy airplanes. My mission during my tenure was to help keep issues that I felt were most important to the majority of the membership at the forefront and try and educate as many members as I could about issues and make the business end more transparent.

As it turned out, they didn't really mean it because I was on their $#it list before I was out of the blocks and yes, those same core members that prompted my political interest, are the same core group that dogged and attacked at every turn while on the board and continue to follow me around the cyberworld hoping that eventually I'll shut up.

That's it in a nutshell. In the end, I made some mistakes along the way and was every bit as bull-headed at times, but always stuck to the facts and truth as I knew them.

My interest on forums comes and goes and fills time when I only have a few minutes or the weather sucks (which has been a lot lately as you may have noticed). Maybe the weather will get better soon and I can get back to shuttin up again so the dogs on my leg can let go and get back to whatever it is that they enjoy more.

Bottom line Jim:

I understand why I don't make your Christmas card list, but there is much you are unaware of. Nothing personal.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

"Holy Grail" quotes??

......hehe........man, we may have more in common than you care to know.

Perhaps we should all stick around to ........

...."make sure, Eee dosn't leave."

Jim_McIntyre

The fanatics will always be around, they may unintentionally detract from their "Holy Grail" but, the grail is unaffected by this behaviour.

What I mean is, there are many well intentioned people defending a refined system that, although not perfect, does work. My concern is that tearing down something that works without providing an alternative is destructive work.

I have little time for those that criticise while providing no viable alternative. It's easy to criticise MAAC, or any other long standing organization for it's external behaviour but, difficult to understand why it has evolved to it's current state, or how it's internal behaviour emerges.....

I don't claim to understand MAAC, I know it does a lot of good and gets little credit for it. I also observe that it's very publicly chastised REPEATEDLY for any perceived mistake by a small disgruntled group who claim their aim is to "educate the masses".

Borrowing another priceless Python quote to illustrate my point:
BURN HER, SHE'S A WITCH!
How do you know she's a witch?
... SHE TURNED ME INTO A NEWT!!!!
... uh ... I got better.

jhelps

I can't speak much for what went on before, that was Keith Morrison's job if I remember correctly, however I mostly followed his lead and removed offensive comment leaving the jist of the argument. There was one post that I think I removed in its entirety, however upon reflection I had the website owner restore it. And Jim, at least while I was there I edited, anyone regardless of who they were or where they were from, if they went beyond the forum rules.

I was going to insist that only one was banned however after a fair amount of looking through old e-mail I discovered that indeed three were banned - I also asked that an additional one be suspended however the website owner chose to caution him. Jim my recollection is that you were there for some time after I took on the task, I was actually disappointed that you left as I thought you brought a lot to the table. Why I asked to leave was simple, I no longer had the time nor desire to police folks who clearly did not want policing. The exact text is still at the other site under the topic "another disaster looming". By the way I was interested to note on the SW zone web site that one of the most vitrolic posters on the MBZ site was nominated as a "leader in the MAAC community". I'm certain he has some excellent qualities, they were just never demonstrated on the site I tried to moderate.


To be fair also look at some of the prolific past posters at the MBZ site whose "home" site is elsewhere. You will note that they saved their nastiest stuff for the MBZ site as they would have been shut down and removed in an instant from their current site if they tried that type of posting there.

Overall it would be great if folks could target issues not each other.

JH

jhelps

"No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!

We have two main weapons ... fear ... surprise ... and an ...

Three, three main weapons ... fear ... surprise ... and an almost fanatical dedication to the pope"

JH

mgaddison

But where else do you or I have an outlet to discuss issues related to MAAC? There isn't any other popular forum that I might be able to hear BOTH sides of a discussion. I just might be able to here.

And since when did the business of MAAC become private and not open for discussion. If judgements or decissions are never called into question, the executive are free to do as they wish with no accountability or consequences for their actions. At least here we can try to do that and if we feel strong enough about a particular subject we can be free to contact our ZD and be able to voice our opinion.

Where is it written that just because it is a volunteer driven organization, we can't question their motives or actions. That dosen't make them immune.

You just took the words right out of my mouth.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

Essentially I was in the majority position for the time I was on the board so I can't agree on the "small disgruntled group" thing as I feel I am more a part of the silent majority.

The notion that I was there to "tear it down" is unjustified. Seeking, change, transparency and accountability is not tearing it down. It is part of the evolutionary process. Parallels can be made with the non-existent debate on our own beloved, very disfunctional and incredibly expensive health care system. It's a sacred cow and nobody is allowed to suggest transparency, accountability or any change lest ye be "PUT on the Cart"........"I think I'll take a walk"......."your not foolin anyone"

Any politician who dares to suggest a better way is immediately beheaded politically by those who cry the sky will fall and is backed by an uninformed public who have been fed BS by the media and the "status quo" types who fear-monger and character assassinate to maintain a system that in fact, ranks near the bottom of the list for quality health care within the developed countries of the world.

I was painted with an anti-competition brush and that has always been the rally-cry no matter what I was saying. It was always a way to deflect from the facts of the issues. In the health care debate, the rally-cry is that any change will result in a US private health care system where poor people die because they don't have insurance. ...................meanwhile people in Canada die in long waiting lines for life-saving surgery? Fact is, neither system is perfect, but examples of systems such as Britains are very good compromises and function much better.

The point is that without honest, factual debate, we can look forward to more

.................."bring out your dead".

kenair

My Feedback: (10)

Just over 10 years ago, no one gave a hoot about MAAK, the local club excutive said join maac and you did and that was that.
Then in 1995 MAAK changed the insurance deductible and offloaded the deductible to the membership. In Manitoba Zone, John Leroux and I started asking questions and taking a close look at MAAC. We were astounded that MAAC was spending $10.00 of our yearly membership fee to service a handful of FAI flyers and only spending $2.00 on the insurance plus the Brandon Nats in 1994 lost a pile of $$ due to internal MAAK / FAi team politics.

BAck then the majority of the maak board were seriuod maak compeitors, you had to woinder if they had your best interests in mind or their best interests in mind.

Manitoba Zone started asking questions back in 1995 and continue to ask questions, now a lot of other members and zones are asking the tough questions.
if MAAK is not held accountable, repeats of Scale 2002, the Brandon Nats, and off loading of costs onto the members will happen again.

Thanks to RCU for the opportunity to give MAAk members an alternative viewpoint on MAAK instead of the MAAk propaganda fed on the rccan.
Perhaps the rccan will lobby rcu to limit freedom of speech and ask that certain members be banned.

can773

My Feedback: (1)

Dont believe everything you read on the internet....

From the MBZ site which lists the 2001 actual budget (quick and dirty as I dont have the latest numbers)....I will assume 10,000 members in 2002, probably not far off and hopefully pessimistic.

FAI - $45047

$4.51 /member, of which roughly half goes to travel funding the other half goes to the ACC for FAI participation (without it you cannot have a Canadian team), or $2.25/member....not $10 as Ken would like you to beleive.

That number is lower today as travel funding was cut 50% or around $10K from previous years so today it would be less per member.

With the $75 membership now, total FAI is costing around 4% of your dues, FAI was not increased with the increased member dues nor should it be.

Back in the day insurance was $29445 or $2.94/member....today insurance is around $125000, or $12.50 /member....

Office staff wages $107082, or $10.71/member....

Lumped office expenses.....$272686.....or $27.27/member ( I beleive this includes the magazine)

Zone Directors......$16649...or $1.66/member

Zone Promotions.....$14266.....or $1.43/member

AGM.....$19989......or $2.00/member

Income.....

Obviously membership, and some term deposit interest....

Of note in '98 the second highest line income was the Nationals @ $10,390......interesting.

Ken would like you to think that MAAC is spending all this membership money sending people around the World to FAI World Championship events.....well they dont. As a multi-time team member who has received money from MAAC for being a member of a team it often is not enough to pay the entry fee.

PS: I am not involved in MAAC politics, I have never been and never will be a ZD, a committee chair, or involved in the executive at any level. I do participate in committees though. I pull no strings and have about as much power to effect change in MAAC as any of the other 10,000+ members who can write a recommendation/resolution. I have competed in two (and soon to be three) World Championships and will continue to do so as long as my fingers work this good......but beware the FAI group of guys (whom I dont know yet) are planning to take over MAAC and rearrange it into our own organization [sm=lol.gif].....the headquarters will be in the salt mines of Romania.

kenair

My Feedback: (10)

Chad - the figures you quote are fairly recent. I was refering to the years 1994 - 1995 when MAAC politics became quite heated with the change in the insurance deductible, the Brandon Nats, Rick Reid and the Aero Club of Canada, all of this raised the awarness of average joe maak member of how MAAK spends your membership $$. Some view any FAI funding as very wasteful considering there are higher priorities for MAAK, such as insurance, frequencies and flying fields.

The big debates started in 1994 and continue to this day, my point is the approach of the rccan of pro SE maak propaganda and banning of opposing views has not help us.
Thanks to guys like MArc Sharpe, Wayne Bransfield, Rick Reid and others that have taken the high heat, Maak has improved greatly since 1994 become more accountable, is stronger now thanks to these guys but has a way to go.

We all want the same thing - fly our toy airplanes and be happy!

cheers - ken

can773

My Feedback: (1)

I quote recent figures because that is what is important, spinning an issue with outdated information is not productive and demonstrates a one sided view. Go ahead and post all the numbers you want about FAI....but post them accurately with today's information.

I just got my MAAC mag today so only newly reviewed the budget numbers, which are there for all to see....unfortunately without explanation some of it is a bit obscured.

I read most of the stuff on RCC, I have no problem with people being banned, but IMO there should have been people banned from both sides of the argument....I see people posting on there who I felt went over the line with their comments. I dont know the extent of who got banned though, and dont really care at this point.

Everyone has political agenda's....Sharpe, Bransfield, and Rick Reid, whom I know personally.....I am familiar with many of the gory details from both sides of that ACC problem and what he did was not right, and he had no authority to do it....although the outcome was favourable........In fact Bransfield along with another in MAAC who I wont mention approached me personally at a contest in May indicating they wanted to remove Harry Ells' from pattern chair because of his political views within MAAC.....so there is your politics in a nutshell....backdoor nonsense on both sides. I declined as regardless of Harry's position politically within the BOD in MAAC he does one hell of a job as pattern chair (we have 100% participation on the committee and very open communication).

MAAC was a bit of mess 10 years ago, and is still a mess today from what see on the inside workings.....and wont improve until people learn to ignore their personal differences.....which is unlikey to happen in a volunteer organization. There is far too much critisim (on every side) at the moment....its volunteer....eventually no one will want to deal with the **** and there will be nobody left to run MAAC. I have been asked a few times if I would accept a nomination for ZD of Alberta and declined every time....I dont need that kind of crap.....I have been asked to run a pattern Nationals here as well....nope.....been asked to run for committee chair many times....not a chance. You dont see many standing up at our zone meeting to take on Jim's job...and I know he is done with doing it....so who will take over? If you cant get anyone to volunteer you wont have much of an organization.

Ultimately if MAAC falls and ceases to exist who do you think will start up a new organization? I have a suspicion where I will place my money in that bet.

kenair

My Feedback: (10)

I'm sorry Chad, old boy, you stand to be corrected, my figures are not outdated but are historical information from the years quoted.

We realize you are trying to protect your own FAI turf, and we understand you are upset about the fai funding cuts, we feel for you but some times you have to see the big picture and sacrifice for the better of the whole, MAAC is strong and getting stronger.

All the politics come from one zone in ON, and the can or rccan is the incubator for the maak politics.
Well I'm off to the shop for a while, shall not be stopping at this thread again.
cheers - ken

can773

My Feedback: (1)

Yes they are, and completely out of date and not in line with the funding today.....its you trying to spin an issue into a light that you want it seen in.

Answer this...why not post the latest numbers? They are relavent to today....10 years ago is outdated Ken.

What are you talking about?....as I indicated I have about as much power to force MAAC to continue in the FAI as you have to remove them. I only posted because your information was misleading (as usual!)......you continually paint FAI as the problem source of MAAC....funny thing is I dont know of anyone on the board today with the exception of the Atlantic ZD who has recently (within the past 10 years) competed in international competition. All of the problems surrounding MAAC today have nothing to do with the FAI.....

Hardly...as I indicated our team raises our own funds....heck we even got a few donations from Manitoba (much appreciated)

Again mis-information....I was approached in BC, by BC people (Bransfield is now living in BC)....the politics are everywhere....in every zone including yours and mine.

Ahhh yes RC Canada is the evil pro-east MAAC propoganda machine LOL...ran by a guy on the east coast whom has never been involved in MAAC politics.....

I think you have been reading too many of your own postings Ken.

I doubt that LOL.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

Hey Chad;

I actually enjoyed your last few postings. No kidding.

You put some thought into these ones. You went to a credible source for some stats, and put forth a decent argument.

It would be interesting to see current numbers and financial breakdowns.

It would be interesting to have the current line-by-line breakdowns to compare to the last ones I had posted at MBZ and compare to the projected numbers that were posted there as well.

.......it would be nice to NOT get into the o'l FAI/sport thing right now.

Ken is correct in the fact that the awareness of the membership and MAAC business is growing. Whether it frightens folks away from the politics or sparks an interest remains to be seen. However, prior to my election, the ZD's job in our zone was left to the dummy who stood up at the meeting and now, after a fews years of enlightening (and stirring the pot) we regularly have some kind of a competition with the end result being Jeff Esslinger, who has been embraced by all the clubs with any political interest. The bar for the ZD keeping all clubs informed on flying and politics has been raised. Hopefully when Jeff moves on, the trend will continue.

Jim_McIntyre

... but you know it will, it's unavoidable as this is a root issue we disagree on....

bbbair

Jim;
I think that you are approaching this from the wrong perspective.

Disagreement is not wrong or evil, it does not make us weak.

Conversation - the exchange of differing opinions - makes us stronger.

This is the stuff of democracy - this is what has made us great.

Would you now stifle the very foundation of our society?

I would think (and hope) that you would encourage the exchange of ideas about our hobby, it shows both leadership and a true interest in the situation.

Carry on Gentlemen! The only real enemies are silence and apathy!

Jim_McIntyre

This I encourage, it's the criticism of volunteers, especially by those who contribute little but criticsim that I disagree with....

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

It's time you defined:

"contribute" ......as it relates to MAAC.