An Open Letter to All Irish Airsofters *mod warning in post 2 and 143, please read*

Puding

I completely understand all your points @Puding but your an intelligent guy so why not suggest options for the problems you've pointed out, this isn't a government, we don't need an oppisition. If everyone makes suggestions we can act on them and if we don't you'll know and can point it out or have your concern raised at the agm.

you talking as if the choice has already been made and this is already in place that is the problems, are you talking as an individual or on behalf of the committee already ?

my opinion is the same as it has always been, but at this stage the iaa is a direct reflection of the community as a whole, it is apathetic its does not care, at this stage the iaa needs to die the individuals that have been the driving force need to move away and as the community grows and matures it will settle down and areas of the hobby will gravitate towards each other and support each other

inviting commercial interests is a last ditched attempt to keep something alive that is to far broken and has to much baggage, if no one else can see the storm on the horizon then fair enough, but i will still support the community if this is what the committee wants but that is the problem i do not hand on heart believe this is what the committee as a whole wants but rather the direct a few individuals fell is right at this point in time

and that is what the iaa has always been, what a few individuals feel is best, and back to the beginning the community is apathetic and reality had never cared

Puding

My point is that the IAA didn't "stop" Iasra, they wanted it to happen. Noone every thought a "chamber of commerce" type thing would be a bad idea and the only difference is that those people will all be working together in one organisation with a common goal.

yes a free standing body separate from the IAA committee structure, this is completely different or is the the committee to know be a defacto chamber of commerce?

Airsoft Reloded

Puding wrote: »

so what makes it more secure? lets look at the current position should we

- IAA now iasra in all but name if this goes ahead
- possible commercial interest running IAA ( lets me realist hear, no one wanted to do it, so existing members have gone to retailers rather than fold, so commercial will be running the organization)
- personal importation ban enforced

very few commercial interested wanted nothing to do with the IAA up until this point, why the c change? there was nothing stopping you guys have more involvement and interest in the past

once again where are the check and balances, will a retailer vote for something that will be negative for their business but positive for the community?

You, the airsoft member. You'll vote against things you disagree with and vote for things you agree with. What else would you like to see put in place?

Puding wrote: »

what about the players that see that as a bad direct for airsoft?

What I said before was just an example, I didn't say it would happen I said it could if it was considered a good thing and again no governing body and accomadate everybody, there is always going to be someone unhappy with a decission no matter what you do.

Puding wrote: »

That was my main concern, what is good for business is not necessarily what is good for the hobby in the long run, hobbyairsoft have said it already most of their business is more transient players or just people that have nothing to do with the 'hobby' of airsoft and has nothing to do with the long term development of the hobby just sales they do not need 'players' as by their own words there doing fine without 'players' and that is not their main revenue source.

The harsh reality is that their are to many sites and shops for Ireland, their are a lot of fly by night sites and retailers that have less that healthy practices, commercial interests can not address this issue with falling foul of competition rules and being accused of all nasty stuff.

I can't think of anyone better to handle sites or retailers who don't go by the law than other sites and retailers whose business depends on the government and garda seeing that we are all legit. You keep illuding to business men not choosing whats best for the sport and choosing whats best for them, can you think of a situation where our aims would diverge? I can't think of a single one bar maybe the importation ban and I'm pretty sure it was the player ran IAA who came up with that so.........

I see the logic in the importation ban personally, the less hastle you cause customs and the garda the less likely you are to have issues with them. I'm not fully up to date with all the details regarding that so this is my uneducated personall opinion on the matter.

Just to be clear on a few subjects here.

Iasra was formed and we joined, we then moved to the IAA because we thought they respresented the airsoft community better and we then helped fcilitate a sit down between the two organisations. We listened to forward thinking people like Fayer and Dave and how they and Derek addressed a few outstanding issues.

My point is that the IAA didn't "stop" Iasra, they wanted it to happen. Noone every thought a "chamber of commerce" type thing would be a bad idea and the only difference is that those people will all be working together in one organisation with a common goal.

If there is no IAA none of you have a voice, none of us have a voice and what then? How do we deal with the doj, protect our sport if there is noone to do it. Don't get me wrong here, I have been critical of the IAA in the past and for good reason most of the time but I have to admit that you just don't really consider the fact that they are normal people with millions of other things to do.

I completely understand all your points @Puding & horgan p but your intelligent guys so why not suggest options for the problems you've pointed out, this isn't a government, none of us need an oppisition. If everyone makes suggestions we can act on them and if we don't you'll know and can point it out or have your concern raised at the agm.

I hear what Oddy says about staying off boards but I like the fact that you can be held to account by the community and address what issues they have publically. Obviously your going to have to deal with people who don't really understand and argue because of that lack of understanding or because they completely disagree but that's life, we can work through it and reach a consensus for the good of the sport.

horgan_p

Let the commercial interests set up the commercial body (If they can agree with each other for long enough),let the players set up the players body.
the 2 bodies work together.
If the commercial interests can't get themselves organized than TS and likewise the players.

Why are we forcing something on people that they blatantly either don't want or don't care enough about ? If people were interested in the IAA then why didn't they stand for nomination ?

My one main question - did the IAA committee approach the commercial interests about this , or did the commercial interests approach the IAA ?

Puding

You, the airsoft member. You'll vote against things you disagree with and vote for things you agree with. What else would you like to see put in place?

i vote at the agm i do not vote at committee meetings, i can vote agiant putting this in place but if it is put in place after that it is up to the committee and that is where these choices will be made

What I said before was just an example, I didn't say it would happen I said it could if it was considered a good thing and again no governing body and accomadate everybody, there is always going to be someone unhappy with a decission no matter what you do.

yes and i;ve always said that you can not please everyone, it is actually one of the issue of the IAA in it tried to be to much to to many and was so diluted it meant nothing, my point was more that the opinions you're stating are know potential policy points if you choice to stand for the committee

I can't think of anyone better to handle sites or retailers who don't go by the law than other sites and retailers whose business depends on the government and garda seeing that we are all legit. You keep illuding to business men not choosing whats best for the sport and choosing whats best for them, can you think of a situation where our aims would diverge? I can't think of a single one bar maybe the importation ban and I'm pretty sure it was the player ran IAA who came up with that so.........

child protection
best practice for downgrading
first aid requirements for sites
pushing sites for basic level of facility's

to name a few, issue that have been outstanding for years tbh

Hivemind187

There has never been, and never will be a case where the collusion of commercial interests with political and governing organisation has not resulted in something exploitative or detrimental to the consumer and general public.

That said - and believe me when I say it disgusts me to my very core - if there is no one willing to stand in the way of a commercial coup (either by taking over the IAA or by allowing it to fold and then claiming victory in the aftermath) then this entire conversation is already academic and moot.

To paraphraze George Carlin; a population gets the leaders it deserves. If you have a lazy, entitled and callow population you get lazy, entitled and callow leaders because thats the talent pool you have to draw from.

Let me be blunt. The association needs to be run by the consumers, not the merchants. Economic considerations should be a tertiary concern after the principals the association was founded upon and the continued freedom to play the game.

We have already seen the kind of measures that the commercial interests have proposed through the now defunct IASRA group. Restriction of sales. Databasing of personal information. Required memberships etc. I know Fayer has pointed out that these kinds of thing are prohibited under Irish law but objectively, that legislation is only as effective as the policing backing it up. Unless the powers-that-be are going to spend a disproportionate ammount of resources to police the commercial actions of a ludicrously small group of people with an ludicrously small economic influence then that policing will never materialize.

On a personal note it's deeply saddening to see something collapse that was so important - a collective effort by a small group of a few hundred to a few thousand people standing up to their own government and saying "We are responsible enough to look after ourselves" - and winning. Not commercial interests with money to throw at a problem. Not vested interests with the ear of politicians. Just ordinary people willing to stand up for themselves.

fayer

On your previous point, I'm smarter than to name names

horgan_p wrote: »

Let the commercial interests set up the commercial body (If they can agree with each other for long enough),let the players set up the players body.

I like this idea, I promoted it, I offered to facilitate the setup of a commercial body that was subordinate to the IAA player (collector) committee. It was torpedoed by paranoid raveings of the conspiracy lobby that try's to run this sport from there arm chairs.


What players to run the IAA???? No one will stand up! And at this point no one should if there only moviation is to keep willing, professionals out.

Puding

What players to run the IAA???? No one will stand up! And at this point no one should if there only moviation is to keep willing, professionals out.

given that why have none of these motivated individuals set up there own body by this point then, as the idea of a commercial body has been out there and as many people have posted promoted by the iaa for years, why do nothing untill this point, i assume by your remarks the iaa approached the retailers then or did the retailer come to the iaa with this idea rather than a separate body#?

Airsoft Reloded

@Puding

Mate all you did there was try to negate everything I said, simply put there are a lot of people trying to work this out and instead of helping or even being constructive your just saying "never, never, never".

Give us another option (one that actually can happen, not just "Players should do it")!

Puding

Airsoft Reloded wrote: »

@Puding

Mate all you did there was try to negate everything I said, simply put there are a lot of people trying to work this out and instead of helping or even being constructive your just saying "never, never, never".

Give us another option (one that actually can happen, not just "Players should do it")!

it is a negative situation in my eyes, and there is no getting away from that, the situation is fundamental broken

now lets get a few things straight, if you know me you know i have been around hear for some time, i try and keep consistent in my view and think i do a good job

- im not a troll
- im not hear to cause trouble
- points i make i make because i feel they need to be made
- i have no vested interest
- i do not actually care if the iaa lives or dies in the short term i'm interested in what is good in the long term

the reality is none of the issue people have raised have been really been answered, there is a lot of talk without any real addressing of the concerns,

little point it is not for me or other players to justify why these changes should not take place. but for us to be convince by others why we should vote for these changes

J.D.R

Puding wrote: »

little point it is not for me or other players to justify why these changes should not take place. but for us to be convince by others why we should vote for these changes

Unanswered questions seems to be a 2 way street on this thread. The only alternative that has been raised so far is for the comercial entities to form their own association and let the IAA fall.

From my reading, there has not been one alternative put forward, apart from "Get the players on the committee"...without anyone actually putting themselves forward.

Puding

J.D.R wrote: »

Unanswered questions seems to be a 2 way street on this thread. The only alternative that has been raised so far is for the comercial entities to form their own association and let the IAA fall.

From my reading, there has not been one alternative put forward, apart from "Get the players on the committee"...without anyone actually putting themselves forward.

alternative has been put forward, commercial interests create there own body, the IAA stands on its own , if that means its folds it folds, but knee jerk reactions to keep the name going to not the answer

as mentioned in my previous post

given that why have none of these motivated individuals set up there own body by this point then, as the idea of a commercial body has been out there and as many people have posted promoted by the iaa for years, why do nothing untill this point, i assume by your remarks the iaa approached the retailers then or did the retailer come to the iaa with this idea rather than a separate body#?

this has been my point of view for a long time, even when i was involved from a commercial point of view, commercial interests have had 3 years to make their own body but the reality is they have an inability to be professional towards each other

im saying the same thing, other are saying the same thing, we're not going to move on our views, this back and forth is unproductive for the community so i will withdraw from this discussion as i would like to see if other who have not said anything want to post rather than this being dominated by a vocal few

Hivemind187

In Puddings defence the burden of proof isnt on him, its on the proposers of this ammendment. Instead of badgering him about "bad vibes" or whatever disingenous rubbish passes for argument lately perhaps try to prove your case in favor of ammending the constitution?

hightower1

Hey all, I dont really subscribe to the internal "politics" that seems to be present here so can someone nutshell the issue for me?

Why exactly would one be opposed to IAA board memebers being shop / site owners?

Sorry if its a very greenhorn question but while I may not understand the internal issues I can grasp the weight of the argument thus far a least.

Zomg Okay

hightower1 wrote: »

Why exactly would one be opposed to IAA board memebers being shop / site owners?

As I understand it, the fear is that an IAA committee made up of all retailers would put our hobby in a direction that benefits their business more than it would benefit the airsofters who don't own a site/shop.

horgan_p

Long story short.

1) the IAA dont have any players who want to be nominated to the committee for the coming year.

2) Some (not all I noticed) of the commercial interests in airsoft (sites and shops) would either like to be or would like to be represented on the committee.

3) This would require a change to the constitution.

Its actually the change to the constitution is what the discussion (such as it is) is about.
Some people would like to see the commercial bodies on the committee others would prefer it if the IAA was kept purely as a players organisation.

J.D.R

Hivemind187 wrote: »

In Puddings defence the burden of proof isnt on him, its on the proposers of this ammendment. Instead of badgering him about "bad vibes" or whatever disingenous rubbish passes for argument lately perhaps try to prove your case in favor of ammending the constitution?

From a players best interest in heart.

• Current constitution, no players putting themselves forward, no committee elected, IAA folds.
• Commercial Bodies from IACA, draw up their own rules/regulations for internal governance
• Uses financial and political clout to become recognised body of Irish Airsoft
• Individual players have no say, in short/long term.

Or, the consitituion can be slightly ratified to allow the commercial side on the committee operating previously drawn up guidelines, the IAA stays alive, and maybe next year individuals will find the time to put themselves forward.

hightower1

Zomg Okay wrote: »

As I understand it, the fear is that an IAA committee made up of all retailers would put our hobby in a direction that benefits their business more than it would benefit the airsofters who don't own a site/shop.

Would you have any examples of how this could be the case?
The only one I can think of at the top of my head would be the import ban which as far as I can see is in legislation regrdless, just not being enforced? The worst that a retailer led IAA could do would be to ask the DOJ to enforce the legislation which would in turn force players to buy Irish?

As it is anyone buying from outside IRL without a retailer license is breaking the law anyway but the gardai / customs just arent enforcing it? In theory if customs destroyed an under 1j rif a player could do nothing about it now anyways.

Thats the only exmaple I could think of that a retailer led IAA would effect players but are there more?

horgan_p

/suspend reality for a second.

something happens that the only people who can sell RIFs are licensed vendors.
2nd hand market vanishes overnight as a side effect.

se conman

Suspend reality for another while ,
A member of the public gets injured by a RIF or one is used illegally (robbery)
No IAA , No voice , No airsoft anymore.

BioHazRd

horgan_p wrote: »

/suspend reality for a second.

something happens that the only people who can sell RIFs are licensed vendors.
2nd hand market vanishes overnight as a side effect.

I'm sorry Paul but that's baseless scaremongering.
It's written in legislation that anyone selling airsoft devices by way of business (or some similar term) must be licensed. When the IAA was dealing with the DOJ the issue of second hand sales was addressed and clarified. That information was posted both here and on the IAA forum indicating that second hand sales Would be unaffected.
No body such as the IAA or whatever has the power to change the law

Also, for matters of clarification, the IAA committee did not approach the retailers about this. I did. And I haven't been a member of the IAA committee for approx 6 months now, so they had no involvement. I did it as I could see the writing on the wall and did not want to have a situation whe the IAA folded and a new body would be set up where there was no player oversight. The IAA already has a constitution and structure that favours the player, that will not change.
this is not a coup, but merely an opportunity for those best placed to help the association to get more involved. They still have to get voted in by the membership, so your democratic rights are still intact.
From speaking with some of the site owners and retailers, I firmly believe that they don't want Ukara or anything like it. There will be no requirement to be a member in order to play. The way the constitution os structured, everything is still player focused, and that will not change

dinko4gr

BioHazRd wrote: »

I'm sorry Paul but that's baseless scaremongering.
It's written in legislation that anyone selling airsoft devices by way of business (or some similar term) must be licensed. When the IAA was dealing with the DOJ the issue of second hand sales was addressed and clarified. That information was posted both here and on the IAA forum indicating that second hand sales Would be unaffected.
No body such as the IAA or whatever has the power to change the law

baseless scaremongering ? it might sound far fetched ... but consider how many players buy second hand or from abroad to get better prices. now scrap that and substitute with only been able to buy from an irish retailer at monopoly driven profit margins . add vat on top and pitch it to the government with a lil bit of lobbying on top.

se conman

And there-in is one of the main problems with the IAA as it stands , lack of communication , Richard has not been on the committee for 6 months yet he is still listed as PRO and (maybe I am wrong) there was nothing to say that he left.

hellfireie

Myself and all the paid up Whiskey Delta Lads will be there, Looking forward to it !!

horgan_p

so the IAA has been run by 2 people and someone who hasn't even logged into the IAA website since Mon Jan 10, 2011 2:01 am for the last 6 months ?
I have got that right , haven't I ?
Tell me again why the whole thing shouldn't be wrapped up ?
Or even tell us all why you didn't announce your resignation properly.

Off topic I know.

And Richard - in my post I did say suspend reality.

BioHazRd

se conman wrote: »

And there-in is one of the main problems with the IAA as it stands , lack of communication , Richard has not been on the committee for 6 months yet he is still listed as PRO and (maybe I am wrong) there was nothing to say that he left.

There was no mention of it at the time at my request. There were some very sensitive issues going on then and any public announcement of my stepping down may have impacted negatively on the work of the association at that time.

horgan_p

" The quorum at Executive Committee meetings shall be four (4)."

Lads , wrap this up. ye've made a balls of it. It's embarrassing now.All credibility is gone.
Sorry , I'll be at the AGM ,but I'm done with this.

BioHazRd

horgan_p wrote: »

" The quorum at Executive Committee meetings shall be four (4)."

Lads , wrap this up. ye've made a balls of it. It's embarrassing now.
Sorry , I'll be at the AGM ,but I'm done with this.

Previous committees have been inquorate and have had their actions retrospectively ratified at the agm. This is accepted procedure in this circumstance.

Airsoft Reloded

dinko4gr wrote: »

baseless scaremongering ? it might sound far fetched ... but consider how many players buy second hand or from abroad to get better prices. now scrap that and substitute with only been able to buy from an irish retailer at monopoly driven profit margins . add vat on top and pitch it to the government with a lil bit of lobbying on top.

Richard just addressed that, you just said exactly what Paul said. Lads none of you have any answers except (why not let the IAA fold up) or (don't let commercial interests be involved). At least we are all trying to find ways forward, put yourself forward for a position on the IAA or don't but don't get involved if you don't care enough to do anything about it (bar bitching).

I don't mean you Puding, I see you have valid concerns but again try to put forward at least one suggestion mate.

deepimpact

If the committee is inquorate (any number less than 4 committee members), the association can run and make decisions, however these decisions need to be ratified by the members at the AGM. This has happened before in the IAA, it is not the "ZOMG, dey dun no haz powah" that seems to be made of it.

Since there are zero nominations for any committee position (notice was given via the forums, twitter, Boards.ie and a number of other forums), the IAA will fold up. That is something that most would agree is unacceptable, especially those that formed the association and those that saw the sport of airsoft through the CJA 2009 into full legal legitimacy.

This proposal is the only alternative available and should be considered, like any other proposal. However, I share the concerns that Puding and others have with regards to policing. We would need robust policies to be put into place by this amendment, something that may need a legal position on.

BioHazRd

I am glad this thread has generated some debate, but in order to really move it along a few points of clarification are needed.

The open letter outlines how things stand at the moment and a possible solution as perceived by those who have put their name to it.

It does not constitute a coup by commercial interests - they still need to get voted in by the membership if the amendment gets passed

The committee will always be subject to the laws of Ireland with respect to competition law, and the data protection act. This can not change

The people who put their names to the letter are not on the IAA committee, nor will all ( or possibly any ) of them put their names forward for election to the committee.

Any incoming committee can not change the laws regarding airsoft in Ireland. Yes, they potentially could have a lobbying role, but to be honest, the chances of the government changing anything in the CJA regarding airsoft are slim to none.

The issue of cartels is a non runner - there are laws in Ireland to address this, so it cannot happen. The same goes for anti competitive practices.

If the IAA is wound down, there will be no representation of airsoft from a unified stance regarding government or sports bodies. Yes, a new organisation could start, but it will take a long time to achieve the status of the IAA and none of the information held by the IAA can be passed over due to data protection laws.

The suggestion was made that the committee be made up of a 50% mix. I would support this, however the reality is, no player having put themselves forward for election, gives us 50% of nothing which is nothing.

If any other clarifications are needed, I will be happy to provide them

Lemming

Tommyboy71 wrote: »

There is one big question here and it is "what if it becomes Ukara 2.0" .

fayer wrote: »

UKARA requires the VCRA (UK Violent Crime reduction act),

I haven't read past page four yet, but I'd like to say something now. I have said this oft times before, but it never seems to sink in for folks.

UKARA IS THE SIDE-EFFECT, NOT THE CAUSE.

Now that I perhaps have people's attention, I will explain the nuances of the above. What people incorrectly claim is "UKARA" or "UKARA 2.0", is in fact the VCRA (Violent Crime Reduction Act, Oct 1st, 2006), which provides a 'skirmisher defence' for airsofters. It is not a blanket cover, it is a defence which means the onus is on you to prove that you may avail of it.

UKARA is the UK's commercial representative body for airsoft, covering sites & retailers and it operates a scheme that allows airsofters register with them to match their own criteria for sales of RIFs. That scheme is to cover retailers first and foremost, but also allows airsofters prove to UK government bodies/agencies that they may avail of the skirmisher defence within the VCRA.

Now for the other important bit:

YOU DO NOT NEED UKARA MEMBERSHIP TO AVAIL OF THE SKIRMISHER DEFENCE.

Granted, it makes life easier, but it is by no means a requirement, other than to purchase RIF's from shops who insist upon providing your UKARA number.

Whilst the VCRA gives plinkers & collectors a raw deal, the VCRA originally had airsoft written out of the equation entirely except for re-enactors & film production. So considering what was the intended original outcome, the skirmisher defence is a necessary evil and one that took an awful lot of legwork to get written into legislation.

Personally speaking, the UKARA scheme is not such a big deal. It's a pain in the ass if you are impulsive and/or don't want to wait to play three games in two months. Otherwise, meh, it's the path of least resistance with official sorts & shops where proof of eligibility regarding the VCRA is concerned.

gerrowadat

The 'suspend reality for a second' argument speaks volumes :-/ Some blatant scaremongering on here, which is disappointing. I've yet to see any problem someone has with commercial interests being on a mixed committee that would't apply to a fully player committee. Paul, I've a lot of respect for you and what you've done for Airsoft in your area, but it's nonsense like this that makes me almost glad you pulled out of running if this is the paranoid and defeatist attitude being taken. If you don't want to be bothered, then don't be involved.

As for the IAA with commercial representation being equivalent to IASRA - I nearly shot tea out my nose. IASRA was a bad joke, and a disaster waiting to happen. Their committee members were answerable to one person at all times, publically accused the DoJ of being incompetent and lying to them, and had a constitution copied and pasted from a shooting club, with no player or retailer guidelines whatsoever. Don't make me laugh.

_ricochet_

I had a look on the IAA website but couldn't find an answer so taught I would ask it here.

Can the changes to the rules be implemented straight away to allow these people on the committee, I would have taught the meeting would have to end before the changes would come into affect.

gerrowadat

_ricochet_ wrote: »

I had a look on the IAA website but couldn't find an answer so taught I would ask it here.

Can the changes to the rules be implemented straight away to allow these people on the committee, I would have taught the meeting would have to end before the changes would come into affect.

What will probably have to happen is that the changes are voted on on the 28th, and an EGM happens some time after that to elect people newly eligible, since there are notice periods mandatory for this sort of thing.

_ricochet_

Thanks, that is what I was thinking.

Lemming

Having had time to think about all of this, I am amazed quite frankly that this is being entertained in the manner put forward.

First of all, I am of the opinion that it was highly inappropriate behaviour from Richard Smith to approach retailers/sites with this idea despite his claims of not being a member of the IAA committee any more, for all of six months. He has inside and in-depth knowledge of the IAA committee that is recent & current, and as such whilst his claim may be technically true, it is dishonest and tbh, I find it unethical.

Ok, enough of that. That's my personal view made on that before getting to the meat of what I wanted to say. If I have picked up who did what wrong, than I shall retract that last paragraph immediately with apologies.

The notion of allowing commercial interests sit on the committee in executive (i.e. voting) positions is simply put; a very bad idea. I'm not sure how else to phrase that other than to re-iterate that it is a very bad idea. Made with the best of intentions I'm sure, but the path to hell was paved with good intentions.

Why do I consider it a bad idea?

As others have said plainly - and accurately - a business will place its future survival first and foremost. That means it may - and probably will - come into direct conflict with whatever matter requires dealt with and move in its own best interest, not the best interests of the community. That is cold, hard, and oft played-out fact the world over. Case in point ironically enough; the UKARA membership scheme.

Given my previous post, I'll explain that one better. Among those who fought hard for the skirmisher defence were representatives from UKARA. Of course, the VCRA never sets out how one avails of the skirmisher defence, and if you ask HMRC they'll mumble, be vague, and probably point you towards the UKARA scheme. On its own merits, it would appear to serve both retailers & community. But it was first & foremost (as far as I am aware & can recall) meant to protect retailers from prosecution by showing that the person buying RIFs was eligible for the defence. That it also benefited the players was a side effect.

How intertwined the skirmisher defence & the UKARA membership scheme was when conceived I don't know. Maybe it was separate, maybe not, I'm not going to claim underhand dealings and I will give those involved the benefit of the doubt & respect for the work that they carried out with respects UK government bodies, but I do want to show just how easy it would be for a commercial entity in a position of power to swing the markets to their advantage at the expense of the larger community.

I am quite perplexed as to why there also seems to be an about-face among IAA members concerning permitting commercially vested entities wield executive power. For years, there debates about this, and then the tooth & nails fight against the beast that was IASRA. I fail to see what has changed now to suddenly make it "all right" now. Perceived necessity does not make for calm, rational decisions; quite the opposite.

What would make more sense, is allowing for non-executive 'representative' positions on the IAA committee for retailers and sites (or both combined into one seat), to allow commercial interests to express their views.

I am also somewhat disappointed to see nobody putting their names forward other than commercial interests, although I have my suspicions as to why but that's a whole other kettle of fish and not for this particular topic for discussion. At the end of the day it's your game, it's your community, and I'll comment that seeing so many commercial entities names signed should be making alarm bells ring inside your heads. There ye go; a load of commercial interests all chomping at the bit for the prospect of executive positions. This brings me back to the path to hell being paved with good intentions. This may seem like scare-mongering to some, but it's not; it's a reality check as to the nature of the beast that is capitalism.

I firmly believe that on this matter, the Irish airsoft community is perhaps too close. In itself, it is a credit, but on this matter it would appear to be blurring the lines for people. Yes, that retailer or site owner may be a mate of yours, but they also run a business; perhaps even a liveli-hood. As a rather crude but apt expresion goes; "Money talks, bulls**t walks".

se conman

This is from the IAA constitution "4. Nomination of candidates will be made at the AGM and shall be seconded by at least one other IAA Individual Member who is not already appointed to the Committee."

This is from the IAA forum "Election of officers for the 2012 committee will take place at the end of the meeting. Nominations for committee positions must be proposed and seconded in writing (AGM Forum, email, or letter) by 5PM on Sunday the 18th of Decemberber. All positions are open and we encourage as many people to stand as possible."
Am I mistaken in thinking that a member can still be nominated at the AGM as per the constitution and that the second quote is against the constitution.

CORaven

It may be an odd question, but why have people not put their names forward as committee candidates? What are members of the committee expected to do, and what is the work load like? Is it some thing that can be done by any oneeven if they are working full time out in the country, or do they have to be in the heart of Dublin and take it on as a full time job?
I think it is odd with the amount of sites in the country that there is not a representative from each.

hrta

Tommyboy71 wrote: »

There is one big question here and it is "what if it becomes Ukara 2.0" . There is a very simple answer. The retailers and sites could wait until the IAA folds and set up their own organisation where the ordinary Joe Soap does not get a look in. That will prevent players,collectors or plinkers from having a voice.

They haven't. They are willing to step up and put themselves forward to keep the IAA going. The players still have a part to play and this is where the checks and balances comes in to play. The chairmans position is non commercial. This is something that the commercial side looked for. They are not looking to take over and run it with all commercial bodies on the committe. Players still have the option to run the association and hold any of the positions. If all of the positions get filled by players then there will be no issue from the commercial side. If there are any dodgy dealings going on, if the members or indeed any of the comittie don't like what's going on they can look for an EGM to be called. Players wont have that if the commercial side set up their own association.

An EGM never happened last year with the previous committee about the defamatory comments and accusations which flew around the IAA forum last year.
Accusations which where never proven or even proven to have been investigated, maybe thats why there's no support for the organization any more.

hrta

BioHazRd wrote: »

Also, for matters of clarification, the IAA committee did not approach the retailers about this. I did. And I haven't been a member of the IAA committee for approx 6 months now, so they had no involvement. I did it as I could see the writing on the wall and did not want to have a situation whe the IAA folded and a new body would be set up where there was no player oversight. The IAA already has a constitution and structure that favours the player, that will not change.

If you were no longer on the IAA committee, who gave you the power to take this on board, And why were only a select few only retailers and site owners approached, should not every retailer and site owner, have been approached.

gerrowadat

hrta wrote: »

If you were no longer on the IAA committee, who gave you the power to take this on board, And why were only a select few only retailers and site owners approached, should not every retailer and site owner, have been approached.

No power required. Richard is one of the most dedicated people around organisation in airsoft, and wasn't prepared to see the IAA just peter out, so he took it upon himself to do this. He doesn't need a mandate or special permission, he's not acting on behalf of anyone. He also particularly doesn't need people trying to put down what he's doing for no good reason.

As for the people approached, I'd imagine it was anyone Richie could have gotten to. As with anything to do with the IAA, it's a volunteer effort, and you get what you can. Considering the stance of some of the names toward the IAA in the past it's an impressive list.

Lemming

gerrowadat wrote: »

No power required. Richard is one of the most dedicated people around organisation in airsoft, and wasn't prepared to see the IAA just peter out, so he took it upon himself to do this. He doesn't need a mandate or special permission, he's not acting on behalf of anyone. He also particularly doesn't need people trying to put down what he's doing for no good reason.

Sorry Dave but I'm calling cobblers on that. It was unethical and highly inappropriate given his recent former position. I would say with very bad judgement. Whilst the intentions may be good, nothing good will come of this proposal and I would say quite the opposite.

I am not "putting down what he's doing" for no good reason. I will instead put it down for very good reason. Can people not understand why very real concerns have been raised by people over this proposal, never mind the manner in which it has been followed through on?

gerrowadat wrote: »

It's also very easy to retrospectively badmouth the IAA when you don't need their help any more.

Not for this thread so I do not expect nor want an answer here since it is not pertinent to this topic, but Paul's questions on that matter are something that I too would like to see everyone involved held accountable for.

I would in fact go so far as to say he's not badmouthing the IAA, but raising questions that need to be asked to re-establish its credibility for the sake of the organisation & the community, since there has been no accountability and transparency in the matter.

gerrowadat

Lemming wrote: »

Sorry Dave but I'm calling cobblers on that. It was unethical and highly inappropriate given his recent former position. I would say with very bad judgement. Whilst the intentions may be good, nothing good will come of this proposal and I would say quite the opposite.

I am not "putting down what he's doing" for no good reason. I will instead put it down for very good reason. Can people not understand why very real concerns have been raised by people over this proposal, never mind the manner in which it has been followed through on?

How is it unethical? Be more specific. Did you hear of him going into retailers and going "Hello, I represent the IAA"? No. He's a person in his own right, every bit as entitled as you or me to work with a group of people and get them behind an idea. There are very few people in this country who would be capable of producing this open letter, getting people to sign it and get behind it, and doing the legwork around it, on their own time and dime. Shame on anyone who picks holes in the motivation. Respect it for the significant gesture it is and respond to it.

The IAA membership can choose to adopt the idea, or run screaming. It's up to them. It's called a democracy, and the above post is exactly the kind of grabastic keyboard warrior bull**** that makes people not want to do this kind of work.

I do understand concerns. I share a lot of them. However, people need to wake the **** up and realise that you don't express concerns by drawing conclusions from them ("I can think of potential problems with this, therefore the whole thing is ****ed"). You express your concerns, and suggest a reasonable course of action.

One reasonable course of action is to fold up the IAA. Another is this amendment. The membership will decide. If you care a lot about, it go to the AGM. If you don't, then ****ing don't. Jesus.

Lemming

gerrowadat wrote: »

How is it unethical? Be more specific. Did you hear of him going into retailers and going "Hello, I represent the IAA"? No. He's a person in his own right, every bit as entitled as you or me to work with a group of people and get them behind an idea.

If you can't get how it would be unethical that someone that was sat on the IAA committee less than six months ago and who has recent & current knowledge of internal matters has now approached a select number of retailers & sites with a suggestion to push for having commercial interests in executive positions, well then I really don't know what to say to you.

There are very few people in this country who would be capable of producing this open letter, getting people to sign it and get behind it, and doing the legwork around it, on their own time and dime. Shame on anyone who picks holes in the motivation. Respect it for the significant gesture it is and respond to it.

Errrr, sorry? Oh, I see. Any position other than the one you say is incorrect? Since when did this become the Union of Soviet Socialist Airsoft? At risk of repeating myself again, I have no doubt that the intentions behind the letter mean well, I question the wisdom in it, because as it stands, what is proposed does not stand up to scrutiny as a good idea.

The IAA membership can choose to adopt the idea, or run screaming. It's up to them. It's called a democracy, and the above post is exactly the kind of grabastic keyboard warrior bull**** that makes people not want to do this kind of work.

What makes people not want to do this kind of work is lack of transparency or accountability. The root of all innuendo and argument, with people mired in baseless accusation instead of being able to get on with things, and others afraid to throw their hat into the ring because they genuinely have no clue as to what is involved with the work and all they see is mud-slinging & inaction.

I do understand concerns. I share a lot of them. However, people need to wake the **** up and realise that you don't express concerns by drawing conclusions from them ("I can think of potential problems with this, therefore the whole thing is ****ed"). You express your concerns, and suggest a reasonable course of action.

I did suggest a course of action. You simply chose to ignore it in your haste to swing digs.

One reasonable course of action is to fold up the IAA. Another is this amendment. The membership will decide. If you care a lot about, it go to the AGM. If you don't, then ****ing don't. Jesus.

Another course of action is to move for EGM concerning nominations and put out a request to the membership for action. As for caring, I'm here aren't I? If I didn't care, I wouldn't post. Nor would anyone else who has posted. TBH, I find your last comment to be childish, insulting, and extremely condescending Gerrowdat.

gerrowadat

Lemming wrote: »

If you can't get how it would be unethical that someone that was sat on the IAA committee less than six months ago and who has recent & current knowledge of internal matters has now approached a select number of retailers & sites with a suggestion to push for having commercial interests in executive positions, well then I really don't know what to say to you.

Let me walk you through this one, since I know it's one for the rocket scientists:

nobody ran for IAA positions, therefore the IAA dies. In order to not have that happen, there needs to be an alternative, which this is.

The information required in order to devise this letter was:

- The knoeledge that the IAA was on the brink of collapse (IAA forums)
- Contact details of retailers and sites (public knowledge).

So would it have been unethical if me or you had done this? Richard didn't use any information the rest of us didn't have.

Errrr, sorry? Oh, I see. Any position other than the one you say is incorrect? Since when did this become the Union of Soviet Socialist Airsoft? At risk of repeating myself again, I have no doubt that the intentions behind the letter mean well, I question the wisdom in it, because as it stands, what is proposed does not stand up to scrutiny as a good idea.

So come to the AGM and vote against it.

Another course of action is to move for EGM concerning nominations and put out a request to the membership for action. As for caring, I'm here aren't I? If I didn't care, I wouldn't post. Nor would anyone else who has posted. TBH, I find your last comment to be childish, insulting, and extremely condescending Gerrowdat.

That statement is so ironic that milk came out my nose.

gerrowadat

hrta wrote: »

And again Dave, these are questions to the name people, could you please stop answering for them, and let them answer the questions, them self's.

As for pyrotechnics offense, look up there phone number, and ring yourself, if you feel that bad about it, Or put in a Freedom of Information request, and if you do could you post it up, for us all to have a look at, thank's.

Firstly, if these people were going to respond, they would respond. It's almost like they're not answerable to you.

Also, if you actually wanted to know the answers to the questions, you'd contact them directly. You probably have half these people's phone numbers in that little device in your pocket. You know as well as I that we're playing to the peanut gallery here, and all asking public questions like this is doing is causing drama.

As for pyro offences, sorry Paul, not rising to it. If I were to ring and garda station it'd be to report wasting of police time. If you have a genuine report, please contact me with the name of the AO, case number, or some other identifier, so I can call them and make a voluntary statement. I asked you for this a year ago, and nothing, yet you still insisted on telling people on your site about this police investigation that's ongoing. Pull the other one.

When did i need the IAA, If i remember, it was me that helped them a lot of the time, and all they done was bad mouth me, for that same help, you should know, thanks.

What should I know? When did the IAA badmouth you? Please be specific, Paul. I am genuinely interested. As for the IAA helping you, how soon you forget 2009 when you had Steve Fay on speed dial for this and that.

se conman

se conman wrote: »

This is from the IAA constitution "4. Nomination of candidates will be made at the AGM and shall be seconded by at least one other IAA Individual Member who is not already appointed to the Committee."

This is from the IAA forum "Election of officers for the 2012 committee will take place at the end of the meeting. Nominations for committee positions must be proposed and seconded in writing (AGM Forum, email, or letter) by 5PM on Sunday the 18th of December. All positions are open and we encourage as many people to stand as possible."
Am I mistaken in thinking that a member can still be nominated at the AGM as per the constitution and that the second quote is against the constitution.

I would like educated opinions on this as some people are interested in nomination due to there possibly being a full and active committee.

gerrowadat

se conman wrote: »

I would like educated opinions on this as some people are interested in nomination due to there possibly being a full and active committee.

Article 9.3 specifies a 40 day notice period for nominations.

se conman

3. Proposals and candidate nominations which it is desired to put before a General Meeting shall be
received in writing by the Executive Secretary at least 40 days before the date of the meeting.
That states a "General meeting" not an AGM.
I am not a legal mind but IMHO this would still leave nominations possible on the day of the AGM. Maybe I am wrong or maybe it is a loop hole. ??????