Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
12467

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 869 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,363 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,363 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,363 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,363 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,363 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭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. ??????


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,363 ✭✭✭gerrowadat


    se conman wrote: »
    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. ??????

    AGM stands for Annual General Meeting


  • Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭se conman


    LOL , yea I know that but if we have people that are now willing and capable of committee positions is there an argument that as the constitution ALSO states "Nomination of candidates will be made at the AGM" that it is possible.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,363 ✭✭✭gerrowadat


    se conman wrote: »
    LOL , yea I know that but if we have people that are now willing and capable of committee positions is there an argument that as the constitution ALSO states "Nomination of candidates will be made at the AGM" that it is possible.

    Afraid not, the two parts say that if a nomination is recieved by the secretary, it also has to be nominated at the AGM.

    If this amendment goes through, what I'm guessing is that there'll be another AGM in 40 or so days after that to elect a committee. If not, well, it's been fun having representation that isn't Derek Talbot having the poor people in the DoJ on speed dial.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,099 ✭✭✭Tommyboy71


    At the AGM, people can be put forward for any of the positions but it will require an EGM to vote those people in.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    Tommyboy71 wrote: »
    At the AGM, people can be put forward for any of the positions but it will require an EGM to vote those people in.

    Would that not make more sense Tommy, than people banging on and making noise about how the only option is their way [allow commercial vested interests] or the high way [wind down]?

    Every option should be explored before committing to a wind-down of the organisation. And yes, every option includes the aforementioned proposal, which is why we're all here discussing it. And again for the record I still believe it is a bad idea made with the best of intentions.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,363 ✭✭✭gerrowadat


    Lemming wrote: »
    Would that not make more sense Tommy, than people banging on and making noise about how the only option is their way [allow commercial vested interests] or the high way [wind down]?

    Every option should be explored before committing to a wind-down of the organisation. And yes, every option includes the aforementioned proposal, which is why we're all here discussing it. And again for the record I still believe it is a bad idea made with the best of intentions.

    That's a bit of a climbdown from 'unethical'.

    I'm not convinced that people are going to sign up for nominations now, given that they've had plenty of time to do so. I'd love to be surprised, though.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,099 ✭✭✭Tommyboy71


    Lemming wrote: »
    Would that not make more sense Tommy, than people banging on and making noise about how the only option is their way [allow commercial vested interests] or the high way [wind down]?

    Every option should be explored before committing to a wind-down of the organisation. And yes, every option includes the aforementioned proposal, which is why we're all here discussing it. And again for the record I still believe it is a bad idea mae with the best of intentions.

    As you said. It is a proposal. Nothing more. The membership could vote against it at the AGM.

    But what will happen then is the commercial sector will,more than likely, set up their own organization and take away the vote of ordinary players.This is all people are discussing. No one is forcing the idea down anyone throats they are merely pointing out the benefits of something they believe in.


  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭drpepper


    Hi all,

    I've just raised my head to see what was new coming up to the AGM and what mad ideas people had proposed. However i am saddened to see that the OP is where we currently stand, the closure of the IAA.

    As a previously active player and committee member i wish to make 2 points here in my splash and dash comments, however having re-read this it could hardly be considered splash and dash, in fact it’s far too long for the internet and won’t be read.

    1. To All Players:
    Shame on you.
    Clearly you either have no idea what the IAA has done for you in the past, which is ignorance.
    Or you don't give a ****, which is arrogance.

    I was luckily involved in this IAA from the grass roots ideas to the 2nd election of committee right through to last years AGM. I could use the line that "i've done my time" and i would be no better than the rest of you, simply taking a pass on a job that needs doing. At present the IAA is on course to disband. All the work put into it gone (so what, no extra work right?), and then when the newspapers get bored and begin the attack on your sport what then huh? You'll be red tipped and see through gunned. You'll have these "weapons", as the media love to call them, taken off you.

    2. To players who were outspoken against the IAA:
    Where the hell are you now huh? Given up your keyboard warrior life and love of debate and question for what? Why don't you stand up and create the committee you had in mind? You may have moved on in life but i hope that if the IAA is to disband and you look back on this then you may think twice about your actions in the past and see that your damages when combined with a flagging community and player base with diminishing returns on good will have set all of this in motion. Shame on you too.

    So I'm clearly rather peppery on this topic and i could continue my harsh criticism to those above but it wouldn't serve any good which i do realise, however I want my disappointment to read loud and clear.

    As to the proposal at present, having been on a player filled committee and witnessed the undermining of the IAA by those commercial and consumer, i cannot honestly say that i think this is a good or bad idea. Many would ask that the commercial interests setup a commercial body seperate, but having been there on the ground level trying to form this years ago i can see why it will never happen so perhaps a closer integration of commercial and consumer needs is a good thing, but I don’t know.

    Lastly, i personally believe that i could man up and take back the position of chair purely to prevent my hard work from disappearing but to what end? Would we see the return of the criticism that the IAA has suffered or would it somehow magically transform to a land of plenty and growth? You do the math.

    Far too many people in this world are selfish, too many look for an opportunity to gain and miss what matters. Representing the sport you love should be an honor and a privilege, not a burden. And here we are, years of hard work to get the IAA reputable, years of opposition to every step the IAA took, and we will have gained nothing if this IAA closes and this sport will die.

    Regards,
    Conor Scolard
    Fan of Airsoft and Pew-Pew.

    (scaremongering is used for effect, batteries not included)


  • Registered Users Posts: 28 Murphino


    Two perspectives folks…

    The sport needs representation. I took up Airsoft last year and have developed a keen passion for the sport. I am firmly on the side of the player but I should come clean by mentioning that I plan to become commercially involved in the not too distant future. I guess at this point in time that puts me firmly on the fence in respect of the issue of commercial involvement in the IAA. When it comes to the main issue though which in my opinion is about the overall representation of the sport in Ireland, I am sure of one thing, we must have a voice. I’ll explain…

    From my player’s perspective, I thank the IAA and indeed all those who have been involved and worked tirelessly to ensure Airsoft is a viable sport for all involved. The sport is legal, has some great sites with good potential and has a defined structure in which to operate. Certain sites though are operated with health and safety concerns and are poorly marketed. The lack of awareness of Airsoft in Ireland is also something to behold and all of the above needs immediate addressing especially if the corporate market is to be successfully attracted which ultimately could become a staple diet of sites country wide.

    From a commercial perspective it is comforting to know that the sport is represented and legal and also importantly, that there is a structure in which to establish a business in what is a growing sport. As a prospective business owner (apologies but I am not yet in a position to identify the business or location) I am a little wary of the challenges that are posed to the sport as identified in the ‘Open Letter’. Particularly of concern to me, are the legislative and planning issues and the inconsistency of Garda Superintendent approval. This should not be an issue for a legal sport unless of course there are legitimate reasons for sites not being granted approval or being shut down. In this case, these reasons should be communicated, forewarned is forearmed as they say.

    To the Airsoft community (community being the operative word) we all have a genuine interest in making sure the sport is safe, interesting and exciting, well promoted and properly represented. Yes, I understand the obvious pitfalls of having those with a commercial interest involved in lobbying or advocacy but one thing is for sure with no representation i.e. the IAA being wound down…we would be heading for very turbulent times which could potentially be the death knell of the sport in Ireland. What message would it send to law enforcers or government if the sports main representative body ceased to be, for one it might erroneously indicate that the sport is perhaps in decline, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

    We need a clear voice whether you’re a retailer, a site, the IAA or (most importantly) a player. Surely if players have not come to the fore to stand for election then we need to move to plan B, but before that happens I ask one question….has this issue or indeed the AGM been properly communicated to all concerned because if it hasn’t how do we expect there to be interest? This forum will certainly help in that regard.

    Attend the AGM later this month in the Red Cow in the interests of keeping this sport alive!


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    Tommyboy71 wrote: »
    But what will happen then is the commercial sector will,more than likely, set up their own organization and take away the vote of ordinary players.

    If the commercial interests wish to do that, then that is their own decision. I would however point out that first & foremost, if people believe that commercial interests would a) do that and b) do so to vest themselves more power vs. the community well then why are people considering allowing them carry out 'b' in the first place by ushering them in the door. It's not a very good argument to make in favour of the proposal.

    If people fear commercial interests will rest power away from players, that's what the IAA is there for, and also, commercial interests would risk alienating the very hand that feeds if they were so inclined to silence their market. That is not a rational business move to make, any which way it gets cut.

    The only reason that commercial interests would split is because they feel they are not being given a voice, which is the exact flip-side of the same coin regards players. If commercial interests are allowed non-executive representative seats on the committee than why would they then feel the need to split. If they are offered a non-executive seat (or seats if we wish to distinguish between retailer & site) that either rotated with the committee or every six months (to avoid accusation or infighting) then I don't see their need to up sticks and re-invent the wheel, establish themselves as a port of call, etc. etc. I should also point out that it took the IAA the better part of two years in order to become known & established, with almost entire community behind them & backing them. I would hazard that whatever commercial body was established would take much longer given a) the possible fallout with the players and b) the media & political tempo has slowed (at least as far as perception goes), so their name wouldn't come up as much in conversation.
    This is all people are discussing. No one is forcing the idea down anyone throats they are merely pointing out the benefits of something they believe in.

    No problems with that Tommy and I'll agree with the sentiment. I'm not seeing any positive arguments from allowing commercial interests sit on the
    committee other than drama about how it'll all fold otherwise.

    Have any mail-shots been sent out to the community regarding the AGM and need for people to step forward? Have any mail-shots been sent out to the community regarding the serious situation the association now faces? Have any mail-shots been sent out to the community concerning this proposal? Or are the committee simply hoping that people are checking the fairly inactive website? The only reason I found out about this was due to this thread, and I'm sure many others are in the same boat too.

    The committee has made - as far as I can see, and I fully accept I may be wrong on this - little or no effort in trying to alert the association in any way shape or form.

    So how can people now be clamouring for "our way or the highway" if this is the first real attempt at bringing the situation to the attention of the membership and greater community?


    Edit: regards DrPepper's comments on stepping up to the plate, I have in the past put my name forward given I have over a decade's worth of committee experience and a couple of years on top of that in a political lobbying capacity. The only reason I have not done so (and did indeed at the time withdraw) was because it became obvious that I was leaving the country on a mid/long term basis. As a result I did not then (and do not now) consider myself to be an appropriate candidate as I am not in much of a position to travel back and forth nor am I present day in/day out within Ireland. Otherwise it would be a very different matter.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,088 ✭✭✭BioHazRd


    Lemming wrote: »
    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.

    Pro tip: check your facts before accusing someone of being dishonest and unethical. Retractions arent worth diddly, and I find your accusations personally hurtful and insulting.

    I didn't come up with this off the top of my head. It came about after a couple of conversations I had had with site owners and retailers who were showing an interest in current developments. We were disappointed to see that no nominations had been put forward for the committee and wondered what THEY could do to keep the IAA alive. I hashed out a few ideas with them, and the result is the letter. At no time did I use any information that wasn't publically available. At no time was I dishonest or misleading with anyone. The only thing I used, was my good relationship that I happen to have with these people to act as a focal point for their concerns.

    I have no problem holding myself up for criticism for doing this, but please do not think there were any ulterior motives on my part other than the survival of the IAA. My stance on the overall issue of commercial involvement with the IAA is well documented and I still stand over my actions.
    I would not stand for a commercially driven organisation, but in the current circumstance we find ourselves in, allowing the commercial interests to have an involvement in the IAA at an executive level is the oly way forward. A separate commercial organisation would be impractical and divisive, and there are perfectly good structures in the IAA to ensure that fair representation for the player is at the forefront. I firmly believe that the only way to progress is by being inclusive and I make no apologies for acting the way that I did
    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.
    Nobody gave me the "power", nor did I need any authorisation - I did it as an individual airsofter and member of the IAA. Regarding the select few, I contacted some people, and other people contacted others. I did not decide on who to contact and nobody was specifically excluded. We simply did not have the time to contact everyone, so of course some people would be left out. That being said, not everyone who was contacted supported the letter so it represents a sample of commercial interests, and never claimed to represent everyone.
    Lemming wrote: »
    Have any mail-shots been sent out to the community regarding the AGM and need for people to step forward?
    My understanding is that when a post is made to the front page of the IAA website, it is also emailed out to all members. I know I get those emails. I will check into this and see if that is factually correct.
    To date there has been no mail shot about this proposal, as the committee had no involvement in it and only learnt of it 1 hour before it was posted.
    Lemming wrote: »
    The committee has made - as far as I can see, and I fully accept I may be wrong on this - little or no effort in trying to alert the association in any way shape or form.
    There you go again, forming your conclusion without giving people the chance to come back with the facts. The AGM notice was posted on the IAA website (and as such, afaik, was also emailed out to all members). It was also posted up here on boards


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,248 ✭✭✭Miscreant


    BioHazRd wrote: »

    My understanding is that when a post is made to the front page of the IAA website, it is also emailed out to all members. I know I get those emails. I will check into this and see if that is factually correct.

    The AGM notice was posted on the IAA website (and as such, afaik, was also emailed out to all members). It was also posted up here on boards

    I'm not going to get into what has transpired over the last number of pages or offer an opinion on the open letter however I was not informed by mail (snail or electronic) that there is an AGM scheduled and I would imagine a good few were not either.
    Perhaps this could be one of the reasons why no-one put themselves forward and not general apathy about the whole thing?
    I would imagine that not all members of the IAA are glued to this forum or the official IAA one to see what is going on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 779 ✭✭✭*DOBBY*


    As someone who is listed on the letter, I'd like to express my thoughts.
    I have always considered myself a player first and foremost and a site operator second to that. I have previously said in conversations to various airsofters/IAA members and IAA committee members that it was a shame that people with comercial interests could not be on the committee , as I would have happily thrown my name in the hat long ago.
    Now in relation to the content of this letter, Im a bit surprised at the few voices in opposition to it. You would think that it has already been approved and on its way to be inacted... it is meerly a suggestion, and that is the way I look at it.
    Here's how I see it, no one had been nominated which leaves the IAA in a dilema. With the change of the constitution to allow comercial interests sit on the committee, we(comercial interests) then could help make up the numbers for it. I would love to see 3 non comercial and 2 comercial making up the committee. I feel the info and knowledge we could bring to the table is invaluable to help out in the running of the IAA.

    I feel strongly enough that I think we should have a representitive body that the DOJ and media/public and players can contact for any info, be it diffusing any issues or just for general PR and information. The fact that the IAA is already known to most of the above is why I think we should try and keep its continuity. I'm not sure why it is being viewed as a comercial takeover by some as it clearly says in the letter that we do not wish to see the IAA become a totally driven comercial entity, and I stand over that.
    I think most of the oppositional comments are viewing this as business Vs. airsofter, but nearly all the people named on the letter are Players. Thats right players , not just businesses. We started playing and were driven by passion of the sport. So I think this should be taken into consideration when making some of the earlier comments.

    To be honest I would of been happy for the IAA to have been flooded with nominations for the committee, and for it to carry on as it was intended. But this is not the case and its very easy for a handful of eloquent posters to object to this on this thread for one reason or another, but the simple fact doesn't change that no one bothered their ar@*e to run for election. My inital knee jerk reaction upon reading all of the posts was , ah fu*k that, let them at it, but you know what , I do give a sh*t about airsoft in this country and will try anything to help further it along its course.

    Damian.


  • Registered Users Posts: 493 ✭✭maddog


    hrta wrote:
    <snip>

    Bren from Fingal Airsoft here.... so long since I logged on I forgot my password for my Fingal account...lol

    <snip>

    The way some of the posts read in this thread you'd swear this is some sort of coup by the commercial side of Airsoft in this Country, when in fact all that Richard did was see a big problem down the road and try and save something that was about to fall flat on it's face!

    If by the very fact that his actions make some players stand up and put themselves forward for the committee then he has done what he has set out to do and that is save it from falling apart! Anyone that knows Richard Smith would easily stand behind him because they know that first and foremost he IS an Airsoft player (And a very genuine gentleman with a passion for our sport) think about this for a second... if he didn't bother his butt what would have happened?

    I can't think of anyone who could have approached the vast majority of retailers and sites and got them to say yes to what is asked of them, that in my opinion shows how much people in the industry trust Richard.

    If you don't want to see this go ahead then get to the meeting and vote:cool: trust me when I say that it would be a lot easier for someone running a business in airsoft to concentrate on their business and families than to do that plus sit on the I.A.A. committee as anyone who has done it will tell you it takes up a lot of your time.

    I'll leave you to slug away at each other and watch as this thread goes down the road of so many threads in here.


    Bren:)
    Fingal Airsoft


  • Registered Users Posts: 960 ✭✭✭jayod30


    After sitting here and reading through all this one thing has stuck out to me most, all the arguing and whining. Honestly, is it any wonder that no one wants to run for positions on the executive committee, its a poison chalice. For a community that's supposed to be so together, from anyone looking in from the outside I'd say its never looked so far apart. And to be fair, although I wouldn't be for a committee made up of retailers, so far, it's them that have been the most positive with their views. An acceptable compromise in my view would be what Damien said, 3 non commercial and 2 commercial making up the committee, providing that can be done of course. But under no circumstances should the IAA as a body be allowed to be wound down, it would send out the wrong message to councilors, politicians and government alike.

    @Conor Scolard I have always been well aware of what the IAA has done for me. The first thing I did when I joined this sport was to sign up to the IAA and continue to do so as some small way of showing my support, not much I know, but my job and family leave me with very little me time as I'm sure goes for alot of other airsofters. Believe me, nothing would give me greater pleasure than having the time to devote to airsoft, something I live and breath and have done so for the last 3/4 years. I'm sure I'm not alone here.

    Well, that's my 2 cents worth, look forward to seeing you all on the 28th:)


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 SeanLEFT


    For someone realitively new to the sport can someone fill in the background details with regard IARSA and UKARA and everything


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,740 ✭✭✭Faolchu


    Tommyboy71 wrote: »
    At the AGM, people can be put forward for any of the positions but it will require an EGM to vote those people in.

    can they not be simply co-opted for 12 months until the Next AGM similar to what happens under Company law or is it written into the constitutions of the IAA that they MUST be proposed prior to and AGM and voted at AGM.


    also as mentioned by someone, can it not be changed that the majority of the committee be made up of players. so a 3-2 split and also that a commercial interest can not hold the position of chairperson, this giving the commercial interest the deciding vote in the event of a tie

    I'm not a member of the IAA so have no idea what the constitution says. I have considered joining the IAA in the past but with all the back biting i see here i cant see any real point and i think that is the root of the current dilemma. Why should anyone be bothered stepping to the plate? yes ok there's the whole the IAA will cease to exist, and we wont have any representation with the Doj etc and these points i think are critical to the continuance of Airsoft in Ireland. But apart from that, why should anyone bother because it seems to me from reading this thread and others that any committee member just gets grief. I dont know too much about what happened in the past, but a line in the sand needs to be drawn so the sport can move on, otherwise even if the IAA continues you'll end up with folks like me who wont sign up simply because there seems to be too much in fighting and not much (visible) progression. i say the above as a non IAA member so have no clue about what the IAA has achieved in the last 12-18 months,


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Bernie Mac


    I honestly think the only way the IAA can move forward and upward is if a new committee of members come in, aware of the horrific and childish past this sport has had between members of the community, but were not involved in it and have no ties with anybody involved (there by influencing their opinion one way or an other).

    This way we can actually have a committee of people who are looking to help protect and improve the sport and the standards that we expect to see in both our retailers and sites. For example concerning sites these include things like chronoing procedure and equipment, marshaling standards, distinguished safe zones and game zones, etc.

    I don't care if they are retailers or players so long as they have the good of the sport at the fore.

    Because as far as I can see if any new players comes along and reads all the **** that has gone on in this thread and been brought back up as it does every time it must reflected incredibly bad on the community and the people involved.


  • Registered Users Posts: 779 ✭✭✭*DOBBY*


    @Jayod30, Don't be misled to think that there is so much bickering and as much arguments in the airsoft community, by seeing what you read here on Boards, as really it does not represent the community as a whole nor does it give a balanced view of same. There was a time when it was a great source of info and felt like a real community but IMO now it just serves for a slanging match between the few who care to use it as such.

    I feel and see the airsoft community completely different to what is portrayed on some of these 'hotly discussed' threads, and it is (I'm happy to say) a very very friendly place to be.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 960 ✭✭✭jayod30


    gerrowadat wrote: »
    Yes, absolutely. A lot of people (like myself) hang around boards just to keep a tide on the nonsense that gets posted here. Sadly, there's a steadily sized band of sleeve-chewers that like to post misinformation -- it does a disservice to new players, and without a voice of reason, a deluded fantasy has a nasty habit of becoming fact.

    Also I do like the lols.
    *DOBBY* wrote: »
    @Jayod30, Don't be misled to think that there is so much bickering and as much arguments in the airsoft community, by seeing what you read here on Boards, as really it does not represent the community as a whole nor does it give a balanced view of same. There was a time when it was a great source of info and felt like a real community but IMO now it just serves for a slanging match between the few who care to use it as such.

    I feel and see the airsoft community completely different to what is portrayed on some of these 'hotly discussed' threads, and it is (I'm happy to say) a very very friendly place to be.

    I agree with you both and I absolutely know how great an airsoft community it is, I have met nothing but the soundest of people since I began and have made some great friends in the process. My point though is how this thread is perceived to people new to the sport, seems alot of personal agendas and opening of old wounds been thrown around, stuff that alot of people don't need or want to see. This thread needs to stay as what it was put up for, saving the IAA, if it can't then it should be locked and leave it to the AGM.:)


Advertisement