Secretary Resigns. Version 2 - Technical Glitch

Post by **Chris** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:13 pm

Unfortunately the previous topic fell into a technical black hole and replies were not being posted. This topic continues here, and the old topic is now locked.

Please, please contact me should you find any other glitches on the site. Many thanks to Ann, and Duncan.

Regards
Chris

Post by **Mark Bowles** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:03 pm

I did edit a post last night and make a comment. When i went to bed it was all on the site, i got up this morning and it was lost and people were unable to get their post on. To RODMET and NEWBOY who both posted to no avail i am sorry, try again.
Anyway hopefully its back to normal now.
Mark

rodmet · Post by **rodmet** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:36 pm

Hi Mark, my post was to the effect that we all know that one person's small mindedness is another person's seeing the bigger picture. Not much doubt here, though, as the bigger picture is surely concerning the resignation of our secretary and how our Society is to be run in the future, which is exactly what has been debated on the discussion board.

We also know that to call someone or a group small minded is pretty patronising and divisive. It is therefore disappointing that someone close to Council(or on Council if the proposed coopting has gone through) takes this line. However it does give another insight into the approach and thinking of some people at the centre of the Society.

Lets hope we are not going to see something along the lines of Kumbria and kronies v. the rest. Also lets hope that if there is a meeting on Nov 1st there will an opportunity for open, well-mannered discussion and no attempt to hide behind protocol to stop it.

New Boy · Post by **New Boy** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 7:45 pm

It is the same old problems with the same old council members but a few facts seem to have been forgotten. It was made common knowledge at Stratford after last years AGM that Mrs. Kay did try to mislead council to get Ken Hobbs appointed as Chairman. What should have happened then was for Mrs. Kay and Mr Hobbs to be removed from council and barred from standing again. If this had happened I suspect we would not be having all this fuss and would indeed be worrying with Welshboy about why calf scour sticks so much in the wash. When friends put their friendship above their duties it invariably goes sour when dealing with people with so little honour. Those friends should be telling the old bullies on council, get out while you can. I suspect instead they are going for the long game and expecting members to cool down and move on. They may be right and get away with it again, in that case we will revisit this argument after secretary number five in nearly as many years. As far as the secretary being used as a pawn is concerned, she does not strike me as the “pawn” type, maybe for some people that is the problem.

ann · Post by **ann** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:56 pm

I have always had great respect for Veronica Schofield and have always consider her a friend however I have to disagree with some of her comments. This discussion board is at the moment our only immediate vessel of expressing our concern at the way events have unfolded after a very pleasant AGM. Life would be wonderful is like widows XP we had a restore point and could turn the clock back. Unfortunately this is not the case. If the DCS had had the foresight to design and managed a discussion board purely for the member’s discussions then the saga would have been kept between the members and not put in the public domain. Many subjects has been discussed on this board and because of this facility we have a lot more members who probably now feel that they are associating with like minded Dexter owners. Unfortunately this is not the case for many members when it comes to the DCS. Yes the secretary’s of the members local groups are sent out copies of the minutes, but by the time we get these, in one case almost 6mths had passed most items have been done and dusted. Am I to assume that the Groups have to photo copy these and post them out to all the group members and what about all the people who are not members of local groups?
Veronica states that some posting have a hidden agenda, unfortunately that is part of life’s rich tapestry, however the concern of 99% of people on this board is that we are losing a very efficient and pleasant secretary, and we are not at all happy about this situation.

If this was a one off, then maybe it would be considered careless however it seems to be a very regular occurrence in the last few years.

However I personally do not at this moment in time think that a SGM without a constructive agenda is the way to go. Let’s see what the council has to say on the 1st Nov as several members have expressed their intentions to attend and take it from there. As the council is responsible to the members one assumes that members attending can report back to their groups. I doubt if Yvonne will remain as secretary, judging by her letter I think to much water has gone under the bridge and I am very sadden by this prospect. However I think council should be given time to inform us of their agenda and if within the next 9 month we are not happy with how things have progressed then may be that’s the time to call for a SGM and ask all the council to stand down at the next AGM and re-stand for their posts. Comments have been made that members do not put themselves forward for election to the council, unfortunately many of the members who have dared to tread this path have found their new enthusiasm is not met with the same reaction and have left feeling that the experience has not been very pleasant.

Sadly people are always more inclined to remember unpleasant experiences in their lives, and as over the many years I have been a member of the DCS, resignations by the wrong people seems to have been quite a common occurrence.

May I suggest that members take the time to write to the council and express their concern over the current events. We know that opinions expressed on this site do not go un-noticed by council, however a written letter sent by recorded delivery is a item which can not be discounted. Comments on a discussion board can be.

Ann Gates

Rob & Alison Kirk · Post by **Rob & Alison Kirk** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:24 pm

Having read Yvonne's resignation letter, bearing in mind that the majority of this Council gave her the position in the first place, three general comments come to mind:-

Firstly, what a dreadful way to treat an employee, in this case our Breed Secretary. She has only held the position for some 16 months, barely enough time to settle down, especially with the move into new offices. She should be given help and guidance from all Council members, not abuse and being told that she is viewed in a bad light by Council. This is disgraceful and should never have taken place. Those responsible should resign forthwith.

Secondly, this group of Council members cannot run the Society efficiently with all the infighting, which was also noticeable after the meeting immediately following the 2006 AGM.

Finally, the present Council should not be allowed to conduct interviews for a new Breed Secretary, let alone work with her, because the same thing will happen again.

The current events are undoubtedly a low point for the Dexter Cattle Society. In my opinion, there should be a vote of no confidence in the current Council, thus enabling the Society to move forward in a positive way.

Robert Kirk
Boram Dexters

redhill · Post by **redhill** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:11 pm

rodmet wrote:Hi Mark, my post was to the effect that we all know that one person's small mindedness is another person's seeing the bigger picture. Not much doubt here, though, as the bigger picture is surely concerning the resignation of our secretary and how our Society is to be run in the future, which is exactly what has been debated on the discussion board.

We also know that to call someone or a group small minded is pretty patronising and divisive. It is therefore disappointing that someone close to Council(or on Council if the proposed coopting has gone through) takes this line. However it does give another insight into the approach and thinking of some people at the centre of the Society.

Lets hope we are not going to see something along the lines of Kumbria and kronies v. the rest. Also lets hope that if there is a meeting on Nov 1st there will an opportunity for open, well-mannered discussion and no attempt to hide behind protocol to stop it.

surley if a vacancy has arisen on council by a resignation then this position should be filled by one of the unsuccesful candidates not by someone who never even put their name forward, are we now in a dictatorship society when did we change from a democratic society? Bill

Edited By redhill on 1193494462

Peter thornton · Post by **Peter thornton** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 5:19 pm

Most societies allow co-option onto committees. It's up to the committee to use this power sensibly and not to usurp the democratic process. i.e. it would not normally co-op someone who was unsuccessful in an immediately preceding election. I don't know the reason for Council wanting to Co-opt but it would not be unreasonable to ask for an explanation.

Very often, co-option is used when there is a need to have someone on a committee which was not apparent at the time of the election or when the person was unavailable for election for some good reason

I am sure the specific person concerned would be an excellent Council member and I would probably put them top of my list in an election, however co-option can be dangerous if a committee/Council is riven with dissent. (I'm speaking in the abstract I simply don't know enough about the inner workings of Council)

Perhaps someone can quote the relevant part of our constitution?

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:05 pm

Co-option can be a useful means of obtaining specialist knowledge, but I would have thought immediately following an election, if the newly elected member didn’t take it up, it would have gone to the candidate with next highest number of votes.

Peter thornton · Post by **Peter thornton** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:09 pm

I forgot to mention something rather important. Depending of the constitution, co-opted members usually don't have a vote.

Martin · Post by **Martin** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:33 pm

Some wise words from Ann (mostly), exept for the fact that I agree with Rob and Alison. We cannot allow this situation to continue and in my view resignations are the least we should expect or accept.
To those that think we should not be discussing this topic here, yes it is sad that we should be doing so but where else can we? We did not choose the subject matter, it has been forced upon us! None of us wanted this, it is others that have manufactured this situation and we who post here have the courage of our convictions and are prepared to say what we believe and put ourselves in the firing line. We are yet to hear from the accused who also have access to this forum, I have aways found it strange that so few council members use it and don't know what conclusions to make from that. We live in an electronic age which most of us embrace, maybe council should too.
This terrible time for the Dexter Society could either be the begining of the end or a new begining. The future is in our hands and we must be carefull but positive, we must not taint ourselves by bickering and back biting, we must view the facts and act with dignity as a society should. I have from the begining of this topic known about the letter and known names, but have been carefull not to mention them, and I believe others should do the same. As many as possible should turn up next week and hopefully the guilty parties will do the honourable thing and resign saving the society from having an EGM and hopefully a claim for constructive dismisal.
I along with many others will be glad when this sorry episode is over and as already mentioned get back to the everyday subjects along with a little light relief we are used to on this forum. Many thanks Mark and Chris for allowing us to debate and discuss both the trivial and important issues.

Martin. Medway Valley Dexters.

Duncan MacIntyre · Post by **Duncan MacIntyre** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:04 pm

A few things worth remembering.

This is not the official DCS site.

Everyone worldwide has access

Not everyone who knows about relevant facts thinks that this is the place to discuss it

I for one know that the situation is not as simple as has been protrayed here.

Read my letter to Council October 2006 on first version of this page.

Since many participants are anonymous it may be erroneous to assume that few council members participate.

Duncan

welshdexterboy · Post by **welshdexterboy** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:06 pm

Duncan i was under the impression that only people who had logged on as a member could actually put something on the board. I remember trying years ago when I used to just drop in every now and then as a nobody and could not join in the topic. I was a Guest then so how do you do this anonymously and as an aside how do you put those little yellow things on?

PS I am glad I met you at the AGM before seeing your scribes on this site or I would have been afraid to come and talk to you.

Duncan MacIntyre · Post by **Duncan MacIntyre** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:37 pm

Welshdexterboy,

my name is Duncan. Don't take offence at this, but yours is not Welshdexterboy. I may have met you, but I still do not know who Welshdexterboy is. Nor will most who read your posts. We have discussed real names versus pseudonyms on this list before. I just think everyone should be open about who they are, but maybe some are nervous of divulging their identity on an open board. The other way to run things is to have a closed group, such as I participate in as a member of the Society of Practicing Veterinary Surgeons. Only members can read what we post, so it is a bit more private, though of course anyone can pass on what we have said.

Duncan

wagra dexters · Post by **wagra dexters** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:40 am

It should be noted that no-one from 'the-rest-of-the-world' has been so rude as to butt in on what is effectively a private conversation, (until now), but I for one wish every one of you all the best in your time of turmoil.

Margaret Weir

Edited By wagra dexters on 1193557551