Ntsa Egm

Sparks

There's an NTSA EGM today in UCD, Belfield, in room A109 of the Arts Building at 1500. All members of the NTSA may attend, but only paid-up members may vote. I'm unsure as to how the committee would respond to non-NTSA members attending; I personally have no objection.

The motion is:

To remove from office, the Public Relations Officer.

(That's me, for those that don't know).

The agenda is:

1. Representation of the Committee presented by the Chairman.
2. Representation of the Public Relations Officer.
3. Questions to either party from the members.
4. Ballot of members.

I've not mentioned it on the boards to this point and would have put the announcement on the NTSA website but the Committee decided that was unnecessary. For those interested in the charges, there aren't any on the notice. For those interested in the representation I put forward in response to this, the document is in the public domain as it was sent by post to the paid-up members of the NTSA and has no doubt been seen by far more, so I've attached it here for those interested.

I'm heading to the EGM now, I'll post back later this evening with more details. If you have questions, ask away, I'll answer.

(BTW, for the purposes of this thread, civdef's the moderator, not me - the charter of the forum still applies, to both me and everyone else!)

Zakalwe

Good luck Sparks, you've done great work here on the boards promoting target shooting. You've never been less that courteous, have always done your best to help others out and have never put the sport in a bad light either through your actions, your posts or your general attitude. I would bet that more than a few people have wandered into this forum idly or ignorantly and left with a deeper understanding or even appreciation of the sports due to yourself.

As far as working with other shooting groups is concerned, anyone can plainly see there is no friction here between the target shooters and the hunters due to your leadership and your working closely with Civ.

jaycee

Best of Luck Sparks..

"Rootin for you.." ..!

Sparks

Alas Zak, not everyone felt that way. The final vote was 29 for the motion, 21 against.
So I'm no longer the NTSA's PRO. On the upside, I now can actually get back to shooting, and of course can give my full and frank opinion on how we run target shooting without having to consider that people might misinterpret what I say as the offical voice of the NTSA board...
...which is liberating

Zakalwe

Sparks wrote:

On the upside, I now can actually get back to shooting,

Ah well, every cloud... and all that

Sparks

Indeed. Plus, I'm free to complain to any government body I want to about the behaviour of any governing body or federation of governing bodies as well.


hmmm. Where did I put that evil smiley?

jaycee

Ho-Hum ..!

Their Loss..!

Rovi

Sparks, sorry to hear of your tribulations and I hope that everything works out for the best once the dust settles.

As a long time member of, and holder of a variety of positions on various club and management committees, I know only too well how a minor personality clash or transgression of ‘official procedure’ can escalate into all out warfare.
When a situation degrades to the point where some or all of the factions are poring through the rules or constitution to find ‘points of order’ with which to further their agenda, it’s probably gone beyond the point of no return as regards the personalities involved.
When one side achieves enough ‘critical mass’ to oust the other (as appears to have happened here), the ‘successful’ side feels vindicated in the righteousness of their position, and the ‘un-successful’ side not unreasonably feels aggrieved that they have been unfairly treated.

All you can do for now is to content yourself in the knowledge that you acted in the best interests of the organisation, and that your absence is their loss. The ‘other side’ will of course, have a diametrically opposed opinion, and good luck to them.

Revel in your newfound freedom to speak your mind without let or hindrance from ‘official policy’ or the party line!
.

Sparks

Rovi wrote:

As a long time member of, and holder of a variety of positions on various club and management committees, I know only too well how a minor personality clash or transgression of ‘official procedure’ can escalate into all out warfare.

True indeed Rovi, though in this case the difference arose over philosophy in the approach to the job and the control over information (the latter of which, as you can imagine, I have strong views on - namely that with very few exceptions, it shouldn't happen).

That said, there were personal comments made during the proceedings that were untrue and insulting; and one at the conclusion of proceedings in particular which I (and everyone I've since spoken to who witnessed it, many of whom sought me out to say so) found to be incredibly distasteful and spiteful. Frankly, a part of me is relieved to no longer be required to work with one or two of the members of that particular committee, and the freedom to never have to come within an ass's roar of them is one I relish.

Revel in your newfound freedom to speak your mind without let or hindrance from ‘official policy’ or the party line! .

Indeed!

1911

Have to say the 29 in my opinion voted the right way.

Sparks

Well, obviously we disagree 1911, and you're entitled to your viewpoint (as were the 28 others who voted - you were there to hear the full story, weren't you?), but I'd have to say that what worries me more is that the only written complaint when this all kicked off was a threat of legal action against the NTSA from the NRPAI unless I was "shut up" about the Tirol Open. This doesn't exactly reflect well on the NRPAI, I think - if a National Governing Body is being bullied into a course of action against one of its own committee members by the threat of legal action from the group that's meant to lobby in the best interests of that NGB, and there's a history of this being the first option chosen when the two bodies disagree... well, I'd say that someone in the umbrella group didn't understand their job description very well, at best. At worst, of course, is the hypothesis that that same somebody actually had the worst interests of the NTSA at heart within the NRPAI. And the rumours I've heard in past months give a great deal of weight to the latter hypothesis, I'm afraid.

It was nice to see, however, that the EGM did look at the comments made about the Tirol Open and found that what I'd said about the Open was in fact correct, the NRPAI Chairman (who is the NTSA Vice-Chairman) had not been involved in any of the organisation and was not informed of the Open by those that organised it until after the event was long over and the NRPAI had been signed up to various serious committments.