Thanks for a quick response from the 'BSAC'

[gareth]

I know we all have a tendance to criticize HQ & the council. So I thought I would post my thanks here.

In the last two weeks I have had a query about the AIC & AIE, which I emailed to the Instructor Training Group Leader (Phil Clifton), & about the BSAC CCR qualification, which I emailed the Technical Group Leader (Jeff Reed).

In both cases I had a prompt reply confirming receipt of my email, then follow up emails replying to my questions.

The email addresses for the NDC are all listed on the site.

<a href="http://www.bsac.org/techserv/ndc/ndcplan.htm" >http://www.bsac.org/techserv/ndc/ndcplan.htm</a>

I would suggest if anyone has a specific question, they look at the NDC steering group & email the appropriate team leader who, from my experience will respond promptly.

Once again my thanks to those who responded to my questions.

[terryh]

I know we all have a tendance to criticize HQ & the council. So I thought I would post my thanks here.

In the last two weeks I have had a query about the AIC & AIE, which I emailed to the Instructor Training Group Leader (Phil Clifton), & about the BSAC CCR qualification, which I emailed the Technical Group Leader (Jeff Reed).

In both cases I had a prompt reply confirming receipt of my email, then follow up emails replying to my questions.

The email addresses for the NDC are all listed on the site.

http://www.bsac.org/techserv/ndc/ndcplan.htm

I would suggest if anyone has a specific question, they look at the NDC steering group & email the appropriate team leader who, from my experience will respond promptly.

Once again my thanks to those who responded to my questions.

Nobody is saying that the NDC etc. dont work hard or awnser questions. Trouble is that at the moment you are the only recipient of this awnser/knowledge.

If a question exposes a lack of available information for one
individual, it should be actioned to ensure that the information
IS available for all in the future.

"Zoning" websites or even mini embedded websites with specific
updating responsibilty to each team might be one awnser, but
the bottom line here is that no matter what the updated systems
are at HQ we still need those who make the decisons to get
posting.

TerryH

[Mike Halligan]

Terry,

My thanks to you and to Gareth for acknowledging questions are answered. That has been my experience, also.

Since being invited to assist HQ, I have given case-specific advice, which I hope has been helpful, to several fellow members and fellow instructors. I do not propose to broadcast any of it. I have often considered a digest, but more important and more urgent matters always overtake that rather pious hope.

Each NDC Group contributes to the e-Bulletin, to BSAC Talk and to BSAC News when it is both pertinent and appropriate. HQ seeks out a contribution when they feel one is overdue. All NDC groups and HQ also pass information and notify apparent shortcomings to their fellows. Such is the collaborative structure operating in support of Council, NDO and HQ. Put simply, it works.

Respect and trust are needed before one might volunteer information. These fora must grant that respect and demonstrate that trust, consistently, in order to earn the same in return. Over recent years they have by the postings made steadily destroyed my former pre-disposition toward disclosure and now have (IMVHO) an impossible hill to climb. I do not know how many of my fellows feel the same, maybe we shall see. However, it is the intolerant and self-fulfilling posts of those pursuing their own agenda that lead me to lurk with a strong prejudice against contributing.

I'm sorry, Terry, time was when I would volunteer information or opinion on this site and clause it with reason, background and environment. That was then, this is now, and there is no turning back the clock.

Mike
Former contributor; now <a href="mailto:Accessibility@bsac.com">Accessibility@bsac.com</a>

[terryh]

Terry,

My thanks to you and to Gareth for acknowledging questions are answered. That has been my experience, also.

Since being invited to assist HQ, I have given case-specific advice, which I hope has been helpful, to several fellow members and fellow instructors. I do not propose to broadcast any of it. I have often considered a digest, but more important and more urgent matters always overtake that rather pious hope.

Each NDC Group contributes to the e-Bulletin, to BSAC Talk and to BSAC News when it is both pertinent and appropriate. HQ seeks out a contribution when they feel one is overdue. All NDC groups and HQ also pass information and notify apparent shortcomings to their fellows. Such is the collaborative structure operating in support of Council, NDO and HQ. Put simply, it works.

Respect and trust are needed before one might volunteer information. These fora must grant that respect and demonstrate that trust, consistently, in order to earn the same in return. Over recent years they have by the postings made steadily destroyed my former pre-disposition toward disclosure and now have (IMVHO) an impossible hill to climb. I do not know how many of my fellows feel the same, maybe we shall see. However, it is the intolerant and self-fulfilling posts of those pursuing their own agenda that lead me to lurk with a strong prejudice against contributing.

I'm sorry, Terry, time was when I would volunteer information or opinion on this site and clause it with reason, background and environment. That was then, this is now, and there is no turning back the clock.

Mike
Former contributor; now <a href="mailto:Accessibility@bsac.com">Accessibility@bsac.com</a>

Hmmm a bit heavy Mike considering fora is by definition an open
area which will attract a level of critiscm, both good and bad.

Plus I'm a bit perturbed over your use of the word respect
and the way its used as a reason not to communicate.
At club level I know that some respect me and some dont. Doesnt
mean that I'm selective with emails or dont update the website.

Surely the whole point is to keep the membership informed of
basic stucture in the first place and then support that
information with any new updates or events. None of this
actually needs to be part of the fora, its all web based.

After that its only the stuff that members find isnt in these
areas that needs discussing on the fora and yes people will
disagree with you.

Take your own remit - accessabilty. Have you got sole/joint
responsibility for your own section of the website? If not,why not?

I really feel that in this day and age when we expect more, not
less information, BSAC could benefit considerably from more
interaction with the membership and that takes a bit more
effort then somebody at HQ asking for copy because they are
short that month!

We need names, personalities, people responsible for getting
the message across. A PR company that looks for the stories
and issues rather than weak requests for info.

BSAC is alive, vibrant and working/diving throughout the UK.
With so much expertise within our ranks its almost criminal
that it should have the dynamism of a dead sheep!

This is the largest club, governing body etc. etc. Can we stop
acting like its a 10 man scuba club that meets once a
fortnight and start broadcasting and fighting its corner.

Next time I see a report on the BBC etc. I want to see a BSAC
club/Instructor named not the usual PADI one.

Get talking, get interactive, get to the membership.

TerryH

[Mike Halligan]

Hmmm a bit heavy Mike considering fora is by definition an open
area which will attract a level of critiscm, both good and bad.

Plus I'm a bit perturbed over your use of the word respect
and the way its used as a reason not to communicate.
That's how you read my words. I offered explanation for my election not to broadcast. So far as I can judge, I can communicate a sight more effectively by other means.

At club level I know that some respect me and some dont. Doesnt
mean that I'm selective with emails or dont update the website.

Surely the whole point is to keep the membership informed of
basic stucture in the first place and then support that
information with any new updates or events. None of this
actually needs to be part of the fora, its all web based.
Such was not my use of the word "respect". Others' respect for me is discretionary and something I must grant in order to earn. However, I do expect that on forum the integrity and honesty of all posters should be respected, save perhaps where they have established a lack of either (or both). The true point is that if anyone needs or wishes to contact me, then NDC contacts are well publicised. Alternatively, HQ refers things promptly and effectively, checking that the message has gone home (as you have acknowledged).

Given behaviours here, I prefer not to post. What do you consider I and/or the BSAC has lost by my taking a line apparently similar to others?

After that its only the stuff that members find isnt in these
areas that needs discussing on the fora and yes people will
disagree with you.
What is not apparent from general reference information should properly be raised with those responsible, so that case-specific advice is given before consideration of expanding or updating that reference material. The fora may help, but may equally mislead and misrepresent, or delay effective solutions, yet clearly they give pleasure to some.

Take your own remit - accessabilty. Have you got sole/joint
responsibility for your own section of the website? If not,why not?
No, I haven't. Your claims for a change to my remit apart, I've no evidence of a need and presumably neither has Keith. Mine is currently a dynamic bag, and it is under significant re-development at the present time. The last thing I need right now is the constraint of web technology.

Regards,

Mike

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

Terry

What Mike is alluding to is unfortunately FACT. Some participants are far too adversarial, anything that a BSAC volunteers says is hacked to bits, taken out of context and extrapolated far beyond any reason and meaning contained within the original response. What is seen by some as the constant whinging and whining does get very tiresome over a period of time, if people keep on getting kicked no matter how hard they try then expect them to walk away eventually.

You probably wont like that response but that is the way that it is. I have tried numerous time to get more participation in the forums and what I have written above is the distilled response given to me by people as the main reason they cannot be bothered. Quite frankly there are times when I have to agree with them!

I can?t change any of that, only the people responsible for creating that situation can. We have a brand new start on the forums ahead of us, now would be a good time to ?out with the old? and start afresh. Some of you are providing the perfect excuse for our volunteers when I try to encourage more participation, if you want more participation then don?t give them that excuse. No I?m not saying that criticism isn?t allowed, all that I am saying (and I have said this many, many times) is that it?s not what is said ? it is the way that it is said.

Some people need to lighten up a bit, I suspect that is what Mike was getting at when he mentioned ?respect?. That?s not respect for position or anything, that is respect towards any fellow human being and fellow club member. Within your own clubs do you go steaming in ranting and raving if somebody hasn?t quite done what you would like ? or do you approach them and resolve the situation in a civilised manner? You?re dealing with real people on these forums, no silly electronic entities, please treat them as such and don?t go steaming in just because it?s electronic.

I?m impervious to all of this, it doesn?t worry me at all, I?m used to it. But before anybody comes back and ?has a go? at either me or Mike for even mentioning such things maybe they should look in the mirror and try to work out what the real cause of the problem is. Yes I am posting this under my ?official? tag ? because what I have just said to you here is EXACTLY what has been put to me many times by many BSAC volunteers. So lighten up a bit folks, be civil, be constructive, and at least acknowledge that we are making the effort.

Regards

Keith L

[Dave Leigh]

Keith, it's you who needs to lighten up. It's you who should have a more back-seat approach to the forums and let the membership get on with it.

Your attitude and continued, inappropriate interventions on here is putting people off. I find it pathetic that you should attempt to blame the membership for lack of participation. It's you who needs to change your attitude to involve the membership - NOT the other way around.

If you want to run these forums for your own benefit, then fine, carry on as you are. If you really want the membership to be involved then just stay away and let us get on with it.

[Andy Wade]

Keith, it's you who needs to lighten up. It's you who should have a more back-seat approach to the forums and let the membership get on with it.

Your attitude and continued, inappropriate interventions on here is putting people off. I find it pathetic that you should attempt to blame the membership for lack of participation. It's you who needs to change your attitude to involve the membership - NOT the other way around.

If you want to run these forums for your own benefit, then fine, carry on as you are. If you really want the membership to be involved then just stay away and let us get on with it.

LOL!
You are joking aren't you? If not, then you obviously have no idea what the forums were like before they were moderated.

[Martin]

Blimey!! Please, Keith, Ignore those remarks.

There are many examples in recent memory of times when completely innapropriate behaviour on the part of certain members of these forums has been detremental to the community at large. One of personal Interest to myself was when Tom Hennessy, after a long period of silence, came out of the darkness, only to be insulted and have rude and aggressive demands made of him in a less than thoughtful way. Unsuprisingly, he has not been heard from since. A great shame, since I personally have many a question relating to the BSAC tables, which I would have loved the opportunity to raise with tom himself.

Keith's attitude I think is, largely, back seat. He ensures that the comments made on these boards are legal, and that the BSAC will not suffer as a result of them. He leaves alot of remarks on them which, were I moderating the forums, I would feel compelled to remove for their lack of respect for others.

Well done, Keith. Keep it up!!

--
Martin

:=Keith, it's you who needs to lighten up. It's you who should have a more back-seat approach to the forums and let the membership get on with it.
:=
:=Your attitude and continued, inappropriate interventions on here is putting people off. I find it pathetic that you should attempt to blame the membership for lack of participation. It's you who needs to change your attitude to involve the membership - NOT the other way around.
:=
:=If you want to run these forums for your own benefit, then fine, carry on as you are. If you really want the membership to be involved then just stay away and let us get on with it.

LOL!
You are joking aren't you? If not, then you obviously have no idea what the forums were like before they were moderated.

[howard lewis]

I can't belive what I've just read. One guy takes the trouble to thank the BSAC for prompt and helpful advice and it sends certain people into a frenzy of criticism. Perhaps this is the problem with the forum Keith. People should get out more.:=I know we all have a tendance to criticize HQ & the council. So I thought I would post my thanks here.

In the last two weeks I have had a query about the AIC & AIE, which I emailed to the Instructor Training Group Leader (Phil Clifton), & about the BSAC CCR qualification, which I emailed the Technical Group Leader (Jeff Reed).

In both cases I had a prompt reply confirming receipt of my email, then follow up emails replying to my questions.

The email addresses for the NDC are all listed on the site.

http://www.bsac.org/techserv/ndc/ndcplan.htm

I would suggest if anyone has a specific question, they look at the NDC steering group & email the appropriate team leader who, from my experience will respond promptly.

Once again my thanks to those who responded to my questions.

[matt]

Given behaviours here, I prefer not to post. What do you consider I and/or the BSAC has lost by my taking a line apparently similar to others?

Approachability.

[Mike Halligan]

:=Given behaviours here, I prefer not to post. What do you consider I and/or the BSAC has lost by my taking a line apparently similar to others?

Approachability.

Thank you, Matt. I acknowledge your concern and apologise if anyone is inconvenienced or offended by my choice. I do revise every forum whenever I can and reply to any accessibility point raised, either direct or on-forum, depending on the nature of the post.

On balance, and in the light of consistent recent performance, similar past experience, the sensitivity of accessibility issues and the dynamism of the legal and social situation, I prefer my own accessibility in these matters to be more private. Therefore, I shall continue to use other, well-publicised, discreet and so far effective means.

Always subject to review, of course.

With regards,
Mike