Elections

[Allan J Bretherton]

OK, so who's the new chairman?

[benpanter]

OK, so who's the new chairman?

Since the AGM hasn't happened yet I don't think we have one...

BS-AC AGM 2005
Saturday 21st May, 2005

BSAC HQ may perform miracles on occasion, but I think that telling the future is probably beyond even them.

[Allan J Bretherton]

:=
:=OK, so who's the new chairman?

Since the AGM hasn't happened yet I don't think we have one...

BS-AC AGM 2005
Saturday 21st May, 2005

BSAC HQ may perform miracles on occasion, but I think that telling the future is probably beyond even them.

Yes, but the elections closed 7th May. Go back just a couple of days and a general election of millions of votes was counted in several hours, I can't see it taking longer to count a few thousand, can you?

Oh, and by the way, HQ don't count the votes, that's the job of the ERS

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

:=:=
:=:=OK, so who's the new chairman?
:=
:=Since the AGM hasn't happened yet I don't think we have one...
:=
:=BS-AC AGM 2005
:=Saturday 21st May, 2005
:=
:=BSAC HQ may perform miracles on occasion, but I think that telling the future is probably beyond even them.

Yes, but the elections closed 7th May. Go back just a couple of days and a general election of millions of votes was counted in several hours, I can't see it taking longer to count a few thousand, can you?

Oh, and by the way, HQ don't count the votes, that's the job of the ERS

You could always try the "Latest News" link from the home page...

K

[Allan J Bretherton]

:=:=:=
:=:=:=OK, so who's the new chairman?
:=:=
:=:=Since the AGM hasn't happened yet I don't think we have one...
:=:=
:=:=BS-AC AGM 2005
:=:=Saturday 21st May, 2005
:=:=
:=:=BSAC HQ may perform miracles on occasion, but I think that telling the future is probably beyond even them.
:=
:=Yes, but the elections closed 7th May. Go back just a couple of days and a general election of millions of votes was counted in several hours, I can't see it taking longer to count a few thousand, can you?
:=
:=Oh, and by the way, HQ don't count the votes, that's the job of the ERS

You could always try the "Latest News" link from the home page...

K

Oh well done Keith, and congratulations on being re-elected

[Bill Bird]

:=:=:=:=
:=:=:=:=OK, so who's the new chairman?
:=:=:=
:=:=:=Since the AGM hasn't happened yet I don't think we have one...
:=:=:=
:=:=:=BS-AC AGM 2005
:=:=:=Saturday 21st May, 2005
:=:=:=
:=:=:=BSAC HQ may perform miracles on occasion, but I think that telling the future is probably beyond even them.
:=:=
:=:=Yes, but the elections closed 7th May. Go back just a couple of days and a general election of millions of votes was counted in several hours, I can't see it taking longer to count a few thousand, can you?
:=:=
:=:=Oh, and by the way, HQ don't count the votes, that's the job of the ERS
:=
:=You could always try the "Latest News" link from the home page...
:=
:=K

Oh well done Keith, and congratulations on being re-elected

Few thousand was a bit optimistic wasn't it? I see that the actual return was under 2,000. That's just a bit depressing.

However, thanks to all candidates who stood for positions, and thanks to all those members who actually took the time to use their votes.


Bill

[Alan Ewart]

Few thousand was a bit optimistic wasn't it? I see that the actual return was under 2,000. That's just a bit depressing.

However, thanks to all candidates who stood for positions, and thanks to all those members who actually took the time to use their votes.


Bill

Isn't it amazing that even in such a highly charged election that only 5% of the electorate bothered to Vote. Even the labour party can better that!!

[David Walker]

Isn't it amazing that even in such a highly charged election that only 5% of the electorate bothered to Vote.

Amazing? Hardly! Highly charged? According to who? A few posts on the BSAC forum, where in reality most of the posts about the election came from maybe 10 or 20 different people?

I've never heard anyone I know discuss anything to do with BSAC elections. If you think about it, its now wholly surprising. The vast majority of members have no contact with HQ, and so effectively have no knowledge of its existence or its possible influence on them. For most branch members, it is the branch committee that has the greatest influence on what they do, not HQ. Whether right or wrong, if you went around clubs and asked normal members (not committees and to some extent instructors) what they thought HQ did, how it was run, etc, most wouldn't have a clue, and probably don't care.

Crap analogy, but it'd be like us voting for say the recruitment staff at our local hospital - absolutely no direct affect on us, but they have the influence to change those who we do have contact with (ie doctors).

Some clubs may encourage it far more than we do - as a Uni club 90% of out members don't even have a vote so there's not much point in the committee putting in the effort to say "vote for BSAC" when it only affects a small proportion of our members (and I can imagine their response!)

David

[alan taylor]

:=Isn't it amazing that even in such a highly charged election that only 5% of the electorate bothered to Vote.

Amazing? Hardly! Highly charged? According to who? A few posts on the BSAC forum, where in reality most of the posts about the election came from maybe 10 or 20 different people?

I've never heard anyone I know discuss anything to do with BSAC elections. If you think about it, its now wholly surprising. The vast majority of members have no contact with HQ, and so effectively have no knowledge of its existence or its possible influence on them. For most branch members, it is the branch committee that has the greatest influence on what they do, not HQ. Whether right or wrong, if you went around clubs and asked normal members (not committees and to some extent instructors) what they thought HQ did, how it was run, etc, most wouldn't have a clue, and probably don't care.

Crap analogy, but it'd be like us voting for say the recruitment staff at our local hospital - absolutely no direct affect on us, but they have the influence to change those who we do have contact with (ie doctors).

Some clubs may encourage it far more than we do - as a Uni club 90% of out members don't even have a vote so there's not much point in the committee putting in the effort to say "vote for BSAC" when it only affects a small proportion of our members (and I can imagine their response!)

David


Shame, Shame, Shame

Alan

[David Walker]

:=Amazing? Hardly! Highly charged? According to who? A few posts on the BSAC forum, where in reality most of the posts about the election came from maybe 10 or 20 different people?
:=
:=I've never heard anyone I know discuss anything to do with BSAC elections. If you think about it, its now wholly surprising. The vast majority of members have no contact with HQ, and so effectively have no knowledge of its existence or its possible influence on them. For most branch members, it is the branch committee that has the greatest influence on what they do, not HQ. Whether right or wrong, if you went around clubs and asked normal members (not committees and to some extent instructors) what they thought HQ did, how it was run, etc, most wouldn't have a clue, and probably don't care.
:=
:=Crap analogy, but it'd be like us voting for say the recruitment staff at our local hospital - absolutely no direct affect on us, but they have the influence to change those who we do have contact with (ie doctors).
:=
:=Some clubs may encourage it far more than we do - as a Uni club 90% of out members don't even have a vote so there's not much point in the committee putting in the effort to say "vote for BSAC" when it only affects a small proportion of our members (and I can imagine their response!)
:=
:=David


Shame, Shame, Shame

Which bit? All of it? :o\

HQ is transparent to most members because of the club system - not a bad thing, but a consequence of the club system is that if members don't know about HQ, and have no interaction with HQ, they probably won't bother to vote for anyone at HQ.

As for the committee not encouraging members to vote, you can hardly expect people who aren't even allowed a vote themself to put any effort into getting others to do so, can you?

David

[Mike Rowley]

David

Whilst not taking issue with anything you have said and not seeking to be contreversial may I just correct one small point that you and others have made, not overtly but by implication.

The people who are at BSAC HQ are not elected members of Council, they are employees of BSAC who administer the club's day to day business. Some may be members, others are not even divers. They administer the Club according to the policy laid down by Council.

The elected members of Council are the Club's board of Directors. They do not work at HQ but are members just like the rest of us, working for the club unpaid and in their liesure time whilst holding down full time jobs. They operate in just the same way as branch committee members and officers, mostly from home, sometimes in meetings, they just do it at a national level.

A pedantic point I know but one that is sometimes lost in the cut and thrust of debate and can lead to people expecting more of Council members than we really have a right to.

Cheers

Mike

[John Cale]

:=Few thousand was a bit optimistic wasn't it? I see that the actual return was under 2,000. That's just a bit depressing.
:=
:=However, thanks to all candidates who stood for positions, and thanks to all those members who actually took the time to use their votes.
:=
:=
:=Bill

Isn't it amazing that even in such a highly charged election that only 5% of the electorate bothered to Vote. Even the labour party can better that!!

I'm with david, below. I don't find it at all amazing. I'm not in a Uni club and all of our members have the vote but I'd suggest that none of us care what happens in the council election, for this reason. I look upon the BSAC as a training agency who provide some of my diving qual's. I also hold qualifications from other agencies. My club is the group of people I see on a Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. The crowd at Ellesmere Port are the people who validate some of my qualifications and the national committee are their board. If the BSAC went up in smoke tomorrow I doubt it would have any impact on me, except that I wouldn't be subjected to that dreadful magazine once a month. I'm sure I'm not the only person who thinks this way.


John

[alan taylor]

:=:=Amazing? Hardly! Highly charged? According to who? A few posts on the BSAC forum, where in reality most of the posts about the election came from maybe 10 or 20 different people?
:=:=
:=:=I've never heard anyone I know discuss anything to do with BSAC elections. If you think about it, its now wholly surprising. The vast majority of members have no contact with HQ, and so effectively have no knowledge of its existence or its possible influence on them. For most branch members, it is the branch committee that has the greatest influence on what they do, not HQ. Whether right or wrong, if you went around clubs and asked normal members (not committees and to some extent instructors) what they thought HQ did, how it was run, etc, most wouldn't have a clue, and probably don't care.
:=:=
:=:=Crap analogy, but it'd be like us voting for say the recruitment staff at our local hospital - absolutely no direct affect on us, but they have the influence to change those who we do have contact with (ie doctors).
:=:=
:=:=Some clubs may encourage it far more than we do - as a Uni club 90% of out members don't even have a vote so there's not much point in the committee putting in the effort to say "vote for BSAC" when it only affects a small proportion of our members (and I can imagine their response!)
:=:=
:=:=David
:=
:=
:=Shame, Shame, Shame

Which bit?

Not bothering to vote no vote no complain.

Alan

All of it? :o\

HQ is transparent to most members because of the club system - not a bad thing, but a consequence of the club system is that if members don't know about HQ, and have no interaction with HQ, they probably won't bother to vote for anyone at HQ.

As for the committee not encouraging members to vote, you can hardly expect people who aren't even allowed a vote themself to put any effort into getting others to do so, can you?

David

[alan taylor]

:=
:=:=Few thousand was a bit optimistic wasn't it? I see that the actual return was under 2,000. That's just a bit depressing.
:=:=
:=:=However, thanks to all candidates who stood for positions, and thanks to all those members who actually took the time to use their votes.
:=:=
:=:=
:=:=Bill
:=
:=Isn't it amazing that even in such a highly charged election that only 5% of the electorate bothered to Vote. Even the labour party can better that!!

I'm with david, below. I don't find it at all amazing. I'm not in a Uni club and all of our members have the vote but I'd suggest that none of us care what happens in the council election, for this reason. I look upon the BSAC as a training agency who provide some of my diving qual's. I also hold qualifications from other agencies. My club is the group of people I see on a Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. The crowd at Ellesmere Port are the people who validate some of my qualifications and the national committee are their board. If the BSAC went up in smoke tomorrow I doubt it would have any impact on me, except that I wouldn't be subjected to that dreadful magazine once a month. I'm sure I'm not the only person who thinks this way.


John

Why bother to be a member at all then.

Alan

[David Walker]

Not bothering to vote no vote no complain.

I think you may have missed a significant part of the point in what I just said - I don't HAVE a vote, so couldn't even if I wanted to!
So, as I am not given a vote, does that mean I have no rights to voice any concerns about any part of BSAC whatsoever? Just as I don't have any say in the directors of Tesco, if I had a problem with them i'd complain too. Exactly the same situation - I don't get a vote in either Tesco or BSAC, but as a paying customer / member of both I have equal rights to complain in both if I so desire!

Sorry to spoil your obviously well thought out logic :O)

David

[David Walker]

Why bother to be a member at all then.

Good question! The answer: because my club requires me to be.

To be completely honest, for clubs who don't do training I don't actually see many benefits for the club to be affliated with BSAC either. The only involvement we've really had with HQ over the past few years has been ordering training materials, booking courses, and renewing membership.

David

[John Cale]

:=:=
:=:=:=Few thousand was a bit optimistic wasn't it? I see that the actual return was under 2,000. That's just a bit depressing.
:=:=:=
:=:=:=However, thanks to all candidates who stood for positions, and thanks to all those members who actually took the time to use their votes.
:=:=:=
:=:=:=
:=:=:=Bill
:=:=
:=:=Isn't it amazing that even in such a highly charged election that only 5% of the electorate bothered to Vote. Even the labour party can better that!!
:=
:=I'm with david, below. I don't find it at all amazing. I'm not in a Uni club and all of our members have the vote but I'd suggest that none of us care what happens in the council election, for this reason. I look upon the BSAC as a training agency who provide some of my diving qual's. I also hold qualifications from other agencies. My club is the group of people I see on a Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. The crowd at Ellesmere Port are the people who validate some of my qualifications and the national committee are their board. If the BSAC went up in smoke tomorrow I doubt it would have any impact on me, except that I wouldn't be subjected to that dreadful magazine once a month. I'm sure I'm not the only person who thinks this way.
:=
:=
:=John

Why bother to be a member at all then.

Alan

See the first line of David's reply below. In fact, for a lot of years when I lived on the south coast I wasn't. I was a member of a group of divers born out of the remnants of a defunct BSAC branch. We had no affiliation, qualifications from a variety of agencies and we went diving. If someone was interested in diving with us but had no qualifications we sent them to a local school (the agency was their choice, we just advised depending on where their aspirations lay). Once they had qualified we took them diving and built up their experience. It was only coz my work involved a transfer to the north east that I rejoined.

John

[alan taylor]

:=Why bother to be a member at all then.

Good question! The answer: because my club requires me to be.

To be completely honest, for clubs who don't do training I don't actually see many benefits for the club to be affliated with BSAC either. The only involvement we've really had with HQ over the past few years has been ordering training materials, booking courses, and renewing membership.

David

So you are of course talking about your BRANCH of the CLUB. Read your last statement again, isn't that what the CLUB does? To the envy of the world. The vast majority of which has been heavily copied and which some have become more than willing to pay and pay and pay for just because they can. Not to mention insurance, travel clubs, book/mail shops etc. Have another good look at what the Club can do for the membership, pretty good value for ?40 odd quid.

Alan
BSAC Member

[alan taylor]

:=:=:=
:=:=:=:=Few thousand was a bit optimistic wasn't it? I see that the actual return was under 2,000. That's just a bit depressing.
:=:=:=:=
:=:=:=:=However, thanks to all candidates who stood for positions, and thanks to all those members who actually took the time to use their votes.
:=:=:=:=
:=:=:=:=
:=:=:=:=Bill
:=:=:=
:=:=:=Isn't it amazing that even in such a highly charged election that only 5% of the electorate bothered to Vote. Even the labour party can better that!!
:=:=
:=:=I'm with david, below. I don't find it at all amazing. I'm not in a Uni club and all of our members have the vote but I'd suggest that none of us care what happens in the council election, for this reason. I look upon the BSAC as a training agency who provide some of my diving qual's. I also hold qualifications from other agencies. My club is the group of people I see on a Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. The crowd at Ellesmere Port are the people who validate some of my qualifications and the national committee are their board. If the BSAC went up in smoke tomorrow I doubt it would have any impact on me, except that I wouldn't be subjected to that dreadful magazine once a month. I'm sure I'm not the only person who thinks this way.
:=:=
:=:=
:=:=John
:=
:=Why bother to be a member at all then.
:=
:=Alan

See the first line of David's reply below. In fact, for a lot of years when I lived on the south coast I wasn't. I was a member of a group of divers born out of the remnants of a defunct BSAC branch. We had no affiliation, qualifications from a variety of agencies and we went diving. If someone was interested in diving with us but had no qualifications we sent them to a local school (the agency was their choice, we just advised depending on where their aspirations lay). Once they had qualified we took them diving and built up their experience. It was only coz my work involved a transfer to the north east that I rejoined.

John

Of course you are quite entitled to dive with who you choose but who organizes the diving, who monitors the diving, who looks after boats transport etc, any common standards or just diving in loose formation,Who gets you out of the poo, letting some one else do all the work.

Take a look at page 20 of DIVE, June 2005, that will tell you what BSAC and BSAC membership is all about.

Of course we all have a choice but if we chose to be a member of a club, BE a CLUB member.

Alan

[David Walker]

So you are of course talking about your BRANCH of the CLUB. Read your last statement again, isn't that what the CLUB does? To the envy of the world. The vast majority of which has been heavily copied and which some have become more than willing to pay and pay and pay for just because they can. Not to mention insurance, travel clubs, book/mail shops etc. Have another good look at what the Club can do for the membership, pretty good value for ?40 odd quid.

Yeah, branch, club, all means the same. Technically my primary branch is also a club anyway because of our affiliation with the Student's Union.

Anyway, yes for training and things BSAC is very good, i'm not denying that - but the point was that for clubs who don't do any training most of the benefits evaporate. And I did say "for clubs who don't do training" if you look.

As a *diver*, the answer to "why bother to be a member" is "very little!". As an *instructor* I need to be a member to keep teaching, which is another reason I still am (the other reason being that my branch requires me to be, as already mentioned).

The main issue I have with BSAC at the minute is that, with all my involvement i've had to have with HQ through instructing, generally we're having to deal with sub-standard materials, or just plain silliness! Recent things have included a lack of instructor notes when we ordered packs for an O2 course, followed by the discovery that the online notes were over 3 years old. As it turns out nothing much has changed, but I think thats probably more through luck than judgement.

Also the very odd situation with instructor notes / slides availability. I really can't follow the logic of that. The new Boat Handling course was introduced recently, with the instructor notes freely available on the website, but the slides you have to e-mail HQ to get. WHY? The images of the slides are on the instructor notes, so its just adding another pointless step for an instructor preparing for the course. For O2, PRM, etc both slides *AND* instructor notes are available. And for OD/SD/DL/AD you can get the slides from places like diveinstruct, but the instructor manual is only available for ?00's in a format that is realistically far too big to carry around for those of us without cars, and so it gets ignored. (And although diveinstruct isn't official BSAC pages, it includes slides uploaded by Mark Allen, which I assume is the same Mark Allen that posts here a lot and is I think on BSAC Council or something, so obviously BSAC have nothing against people seeing the slides).
So WHY? I mean seriously, where is the logic? Slides only for some, instructor notes only for others, and both slides and instructor notes for a few courses...? It just comes across as one person in BSAC having no idea what anyone else is doing. The thing with not giving full access to slides for the BH for example seems to be nothing more than pointless bureaucracy. You need to register the SDC to get the course recognised, and i'm pretty certain when you send that form in you won't get a CD back with the slides on, or printed transparencies of them - its an extra step to e-mail HQ to get them sent back.

Our instructor manual lives in a filing cabinet at the club, because i'm not going to cart that around with me every week on the bus and carry it around to uni lectures all day before going to the club on the evening. If they were available online or on a CD I could easily access that anywhere, I would be able to look through the notes the night before at home, and I think teaching quality would improve. Very easy to do, but the disjointed logic of BSAC won't provide it - either means I have to lug the big manual around with me, buy two copies to keep at the club and home, go and sit in the club the night before lectures to read the manual, or (as I usually do) go in early to have a flick through everything before the course. Ideal? Hardly!

Sorry, you've got me going again... I'll try to be nice, I do like BSAC really, its just some things I find incredibly annoying, especially as there's no logic behind most of them.

David