Poll. Should the NASRPC Constitution be changed at EGM

clivej

Poll to gauge the feelings of people to this thread
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057684551

tac foley

Got no dog in this race, me, so I won't tick a box as that is not a valid POV. But if I had, bearing mind post #9 on the linked thread, I'd say yes.

tac

BillBen

No

Gleefulprinter

BillBen wrote: »

No

Yes.

BattleCorp

Gleefulprinter wrote: »

Yes.

Why?

You do realise that you are voting to get rid of your vote?

BattleCorp

Gleefulprinter wrote: »

Just because I dont agree with you LB6 doesnt me I am trolling. The reason I left a one word answer is because there is another thread for this.
Maybe next time have a think about what you are going to write so you can contribute something worthwhile.

The old constitution is so bad that there are so many types of what a member is. you need to look at what the organisation is. An umbrella of clubs for clubs. Makes more sense.

If it's only for clubs, why did individual club members always get a vote at the AGM?

Vegeta

BattleCorp wrote: »

If it's only for clubs, why did individual club members always get a vote at the AGM?

BattleCorp, I am not an NASRPC member and unconstitutional/dodgy voting aside, you must acknowledge that you're aware of other associations which are run like this i.e. clubs get votes not individual members.

If you feel that you'd rather individuals of an association get a vote, then that's all cool. In fact I'd argue for your ability to express this opinion

On the other side of that coin though some people may be members of associations where only the club gets a vote and they genuinely prefer that association structure. I'd equally like listen to this opinion too.

As an outsider both opinions will always appear to be as valid as each other. I see merit in both approaches.

BattleCorp

Vegeta wrote: »

BattleCorp, I am not an NASRPC member and unconstitutional/dodgy voting aside, you must acknowledge that you're aware of other associations which are run like this i.e. clubs get votes not individual members.

If you feel that you'd rather individuals of an association get a vote, then that's all cool. In fact I'd argue for your ability to express this opinion

On the other side of that coin though some people may be members of associations where only the club gets a vote and they genuinely prefer that association structure. I'd equally like listen to this opinion too.

As an outsider both opinions will always appear to be as valid as each other. I see merit in both approaches.

You are indeed correct, I am aware of other organisations where only clubs and not club members get to vote at AGM's and EGM's. And that's fine. I've no problem with that. It's what you get when you sign up to such organisations with such arrangements in place.

However, as far as I'm aware, the NASRPC was set up from the beginning with voting arrangements whereby affiliated club members get to vote at AGM's and EGM's. That's the way it has been for as long as I've been shooting in NASRPC competitions.

I don't see it as a progressive move to change from this system. Why change it? And I'm not against democracy either. If people vote to change it, then so be it. I'll accept the majority vote.

But calling an EGM to change the Constitution where circumstances aren't ideal isn't the way to go. There are questions regarding the status of the current constitution, do the rules allow for the Constitution to be changed at an EGM. Do the rules allow for only clubs to have a vote at an EGM? They are serious points that need to be clarified.

Those two points could be taken out of the equation if the NASRPC didn't hold the EGM but instead held an AGM and let the new Constitution be a motion there. That way everyone would get a vote on the issue.

If it was passed at the AGM where everyone had a vote, then I'd be ok with that.

This EGM method, it's all wrong.

Cass

One time only warning.

Cut out the crap. No accusations, name calling, etc.

Any breach will result in deletion of post and infraction.

badaj0z

BattleCorp wrote: »

However, as far as I'm aware, the NASRPC was set up from the beginning with voting arrangements whereby affiliated club members get to vote at AGM's and EGM's. That's the way it has been for as long as I've been shooting in NASRPC competitions.

BattleCorp wrote: »

If it's only for clubs, why did individual club members always get a vote at the AGM?

This is incorrect BC. The constitution was only changed to allow the floor to vote in 2013. It could be a year either side of this year. I could not find the minutes but I remember reading the proposal and the note that it has passed.Up to this time, since the foundation of the NASRC, which became the NASRPC, only the clubs could vote. So for over 50 years, the club voting method was used. I am still researching to see if the way the constitution was changed at that time(2013) was valid as there are indications that the wrong procedure was used.

xesse

badaj0z wrote: »

This is incorrect BC. The constitution was only changed to allow the floor to vote in 2013. It could be a year either side of this year. I could not find the minutes but I remember reading the proposal and the note that it has passed.Up to this time, since the foundation of the NASRC, which became the NASRPC, only the clubs could vote. So for over 50 years, the club voting method was used. I am still researching to see if the way the constitution was changed at that time(2013) was valid as there are indications that the wrong procedure was used.

You must have got that info from some Fake news site..i was voting from the floor @ NASRPC AGM's since DTSC days (2007-08) until now

badaj0z

xesse wrote: »

You must have got that info from some Fake news site..i was voting from the floor @ NASRPC AGM's since DTSC days (2007-08) until now

You may have been, but you were not so doing according to the constitution in force at the time. I wonder whether any other similar infractions occurred?

Rimfire Shooter

Any chance of adding an "I used to care but don't anymore" option?

SVI40

I served on the NASRC (as it was called then) committee back around 1994 for a couple of years, and back then it was always only the clubs that got to vote. It was that way up until 2001, when I had to put my shooting on hold for a few years.

The constitution back then was one club, one vote.

I'd be very interested in seeing when that changed, and how it was voted on.

Does anyone have a copy of the minutes from the AGM or EGM when this changed?

Gleefulprinter

That is really interesting SV140. Seems to show what the organisation should be doing. It would be interesting to see when this changed and why, if it did.

Rimfire Shooter

Having thought long & hard about this I've now decided that the NASRPC should adopt the proposed changes either by EGM or AGM.

In tandem NASRPC should recognise GRPAI as the NGB for "gallery" shooting. They should also recognise NRBAI for BR etc.

If NASRPC is as claimed by the new committee to only represent "clubs" then it should not also be claiming to be the NGB for the various disciplines. Each discipline should have it's own organisation, run by the actual participants, irregardless of an individuals club membership or lack of same.

Essentially, you cannot have your cake & eat it.

BattleCorp

Gleefulprinter wrote: »

That is really interesting SV140. Seems to show what the organisation should be doing. It would be interesting to see when this changed and why, if it did.

Gleefulprinter, no matter what side of the fence people are on, this poll shows that a lot of people are unhappy with the forcing through of this Constitution at the EGM. Granted, it's only a very small sample but this poll shows that half the people on here are against the EGM. That shows that there are problems with the way this Constitution issue is being handled.

Like I said earlier, an AGM is due around this time. Why won't the NASRPC put this Constitution to the floor of the AGM and let everybody vote on it? That'd be the fairest way of doing it as it removes any doubts about the validity of the vote.

If the Constitution gets passed at an AGM, then nobody can have any complaints as it would be done in the correct manner. It would remove the club v club member voting issue and it would also remove any doubts about the validity of the current Constitution. I would 100% accept the validity of the vote on the new Constitution if it was held at an AGM where we all got to vote.

I still don't know if the NASRPC will allow me a vote at the EGM. I don't see where in the Constitution it says voting is different at an EGM to an AGM yet the NASRPC are pushing ahead with the line that only clubs can vote.

There should be someone from the NASRPC explaining these decisions and answering questions but there's a wall of silence from them.

I'm not against the NASRPC. It's a good organisation and I've enjoyed my shooting and made plenty of friends. I won't fall out with anyone but I don't like the way that they are trying to bring in this Constitution pretty much through the back door. That's my thinking anyway.

jb88

That's interesting it is 50/50 on boards,

Yet only one person was for it in my club out of 400

Shows the relevance of voting on boards for this.

Well done to all fellow club members for standing up for whats right,

Gleefulprinter

jb88 wrote: »

That's interesting it is 50/50 on boards,

Yet only one person was for it in my club out of 400

Shows the relevance of voting on boards for this.

Well done to all fellow club members for standing up for whats right,

I don't think any of us have faith in your maths skills to be honest.

Rimfire Shooter

jb88 wrote: »

That's interesting it is 50/50 on boards,

Yet only one person was for it in my club out of 400

Shows the relevance of voting on boards for this.

Well done to all fellow club members for standing up for whats right,

There's a club with 400 members? Fair enough. So you're saying 400/400 voiced an opinion on this? I really doubt that!