How to Derail a Topic with a Personal Dispute.

rrpc

For an intelligent chap, you seem to miss the glaringly obvious. One would assume that he would have eventually read his email, hence the read receipt. Lots of people I correspond with do not check their email regularly, sometimes as much as a week can go by without a reply. In any event, the chairman did say at the EGM that he got an email, but that he hadn't read it at the time you asked the question of him.

And it doesn't explain why several emails and conversations elicited no response from the NTSA/NRPAI treasurer either.

That question would be better directed to the person concerned. I recall the same person, when asked, said he did not hear you address the question to the chairman.

Im any event, Declan says he sent an email. The chairman says he received it. Therefore an email was sent and received.

Sparks

rrpc wrote:

Im any event, Declan says he sent an email. The chairman says he received it. Therefore an email was sent and received.

Alright, I don't accept this, but the argument on that one point isn't getting us anywhere so let's take it as a given.

So, Declan sends an email saying "I'm thinking of doing this, what do you think?". But the Chairman doesn't respond until after the Tyrol Open (after all, he said specifically to us that he didn't read the email till after the event). This means that Declan went ahead and organised the event without getting feedback from the Chairman. Now if Declan's job was to do this sort of thing, then at least you could say that it fell within his area of responsibility - but his job was to be the PRO, and there specifically was no person in the NRPAI with an area of responsibility which would make the NRPAI a National Governing Body, by design. How you can say the PRO's job includes converting the very fundamental nature of the organisation from one thing to another while personally selecting a team from a closed list to represent the country on an international level without any of the appropriate gear and, from what Declan says, no training; well, it's quite lost on me.

rrpc

Sparks wrote:

Alright, I don't accept this, but the argument on that one point isn't getting us anywhere so let's take it as a given.

Why not?, It's there in black & white. You can't expect to be taken seriously, if you do not accept an answer when it is given and proven to be true.

So, Declan sends an email saying "I'm thinking of doing this, what do you think?". But the Chairman doesn't respond until after the Tyrol Open (after all, he said specifically to us that he didn't read the email till after the event). This means that Declan went ahead and organised the event without getting feedback from the Chairman.

So you are accepting the fact of the email. What feedback could be expected from the NTSA reps?. The organisation does not have a role in PPC shooting. If the email was intended to elicit names of people interested in taking part, a non response would be interpreted to mean no interest from NTSA members, which would not be wholly unexpected.

Now if Declan's job was to do this sort of thing, then at least you could say that it fell within his area of responsibility - but his job was to be the PRO, and there specifically was no person in the NRPAI with an area of responsibility which would make the NRPAI a National Governing Body, by design. How you can say the PRO's job includes converting the very fundamental nature of the organisation from one thing to another while personally selecting a team from a closed list to represent the country on an international level without any of the appropriate gear and, from what Declan says, no training; well, it's quite lost on me.

Let's look at this another way. Whose responsibility would it have been had Declan not got involved?

Sparks

rrpc wrote:

Why not?

I don't accept it because it does not tally with the conversations I had with the parties involved, face to face. But I didn't keep a tape recorder on me so I can't prove what was and wasn't said, it comes down to whose word you believe. And we could argue that can of worms from now until everyone's died of old age and still not get anywhere.

So you are accepting the fact of the email.

For the purposes of argument, yes. I can't provide proof one way or the other (I don't habitually record all my conversations with people :rolleyes: ).

What feedback could be expected from the NTSA reps?

How about "Hold on here a moment, the ISSF is having a major row with practical shooting, we can't get dragged into this, so do it through the NPA please"? The NRPAI chairman may not have read Declan's email by the time I spoke to him in rathdrum; he had read mine about the problems involved for the NTSA.

Let's look at this another way. Whose responsibility would it have been had Declan not got involved?

The NPA's at the time, now the NASRC's. NOT the umbrella body which ties all of us to whatever it does on it's own. The NASRC gallery rifle team, for example, has nothing to do with the NTSA; but if it were the NRPAI team, it could be linked to us because we're a part of the NRPAI. Besides which, the NRPAI's job is not to be a national governing body; it's not meant to be anything more than a single point of contact for the Irish Sports Council, and to change it on that fundamental a level on the basis of an invite that arrived in the post one day is just utterly unacceptable. What's next, will we see the NRPAI Olympic Team competing, as was threatened directly during the NTSA's AGM???

rrpc

Sparks wrote:

I don't accept it because it does not tally with the conversations I had with the parties involved, face to face.

It could also be the case that the people concerned could have been turning a blind ear to you on this and other subjects.

The NPA's at the time, now the NASRC's

The NPA, as an organisation AFAIK was to all intents and purposes no longer a functioning organisation. The fact the the NASRC is now running the show, would support this. Sometimes events can overtake organisations so that ad hocery becomes the order of the day, until the structures can catch up. I take it that you are happy with the current siituation of the NASRC running the show?

Sparks

rrpc wrote:

It could also be the case that the people concerned could have been turning a blind ear to you on this and other subjects.

Which would say rather a lot about their committment to the sport to be honest, but I didn't want to be the one to say it lest some parties think I was crying "poor me!".

The NPA, as an organisation AFAIK was to all intents and purposes no longer a functioning organisation.

So nominate someone with an interest to take charge of it and use its name. Could have been done easily; wasn't. And since Declan was the one who proposed keeping the NPA around as a placeholder organisation at an NRPAI AGM not too long ago, it's not like the idea would have needed a huge amount of unknown information.

The fact the the NASRC is now running the show, would support this. Sometimes events can overtake organisations so that ad hocery becomes the order of the day, until the structures can catch up.

There's a difference between having to do things in an ad hoc manner temporarily (which we've all had to do) and doing them in a manner that puts others at risk (which none of us should have to accept).

I take it that you are happy with the current siituation of the NASRC running the show?

None, it's got nothing to do with what I do and doesn't impact badly on it. Be safe, have fun, frankly. But this wasn't the situation when the team was listed as an NRPAI team.

FLAG

Mark: I despair, I responded to your questions and it appears that you have so many issues with the responses that I cannot get through to you at all. In fairness I have tried but I do not believe any answer no matter what is said will satisfy your appetite for argument. Why in gods name where you not born with an interest in another sport so you could torment them or perhaps you have and do and we are just another sport that you are trying to rip apart.

I believe I did a reasonable job over the last 10 years, despite all your comments things are somewhat better in the world of sport shooting, regardless of the sporting discipline that one participates in, would things be much different had I not been involved? we will never know. But know this, things would be a lot better without your input.

Because of the volumes of critical analysis of my responses to your queries it is clear that no matter what I say you will have something further to add and tear my responses apart, I really do not have time for this, so the discussion is closed as far as I am concerned. You will note this comment is added during my lunch-time, I have an honest living to earn and I intend to get back to it.

Sparks

What a surprise Declan. Everytime someone asks you a question, this is the same response that they get. We saw it in the Irish Shooters Digest in your reply to an NRPAI member who complained that the scheduled safety course was cancelled without notice, I've seen it more than once in your emails to me, and now we've all seen it here. As I said earlier Declan, it's all noise and no information.

For the record, the unanswered questions are:

• On the ISC letter; why was your first response not to contact me to discuss the idea, even if only to explain why you thought I was misinformed, but instead to go and write a formal public letter to the source of all our funding?
• Would it be an accurate summation of your legal threat against myself and the NTSA on the NTSA website that what I said about the case was accurate and what you said was in its essence a petty swipe made in fustration at a single line of text in the post, but a swipe which was done in the name of the NRPAI (and thus in the name of every shooter in the NTSA, NSAI, NASRC and Pony Club)?
• On carding grants, why did you oppose the change from a less fair system to a more fair one, especially when that change could have brought in as much as €60,000 per annum more directly into shooter's pockets?
• Why did you write an email to the NTSA Chairman threatening legal action unless I was taken off the NTSA committee?
• Why do you think I have an aversion to fullbore pistols when ISSF pistols go up past 9mm in calibre?
• On funding levels and Baton Twirlers; At that time, weren't olympic sports funded through the OCI, not the Dept. of Sport? And wouldn't that mean that the total funding to shooting would have been in excess of 30k according to your figures, which means that the Baton Twirlers never had more money than us, it was just that they got more from one particular source than we did? And wouldn't it be true to say that in fact the total amount of money flowing into shooting since that point has gone downhill for rifle shooters, since we now get far less than £30,000 per annum (not counting the carding grants, which go directly to individual shooters and not the sport as a whole)?
• The floor was given voting rights in direct contradiction to the NRPAI constitution. Why was this done without any prior notification whatsoever? edit: and why wasn't it mentioned in the minutes of the AGM?
• Why did you support voting on motions in the AGM which were not published on the official agenda and which were voted on by those who had no legitimate voting rights within the NRPAI?
• Why, in light of the blatent ignoring of voting rights, and the voting on motions which were not in the Agenda, would you support the AGM as being valid?
• Does the NRPAI see itself as more than an umbrella body?
• Why did you, in front of my eyes at the NRPAI AGM a few years ago, dismiss the request from the Midlands Rifle Club to form a fullbore NGB within the framework of the NRPAI as being a bad idea because "we have too many bodies allready", at a time where there was an obvious need for such an NGB and no group interested in taking it on other than the MRC's group? And do you not feel that your actions were counter-productive, especially now that the MRC lads have had to go off and form an internationally-recognised NGB for fullbore shooting that isn't in the NRPAI?
• You were sitting at your kitchen table with me, another NTSA committee member, and an NASRC committee member at the 22/4/04 NRPAI committee meeting and you told us that the NRPAI was now a signed-up affiliate to the NRA. Were you factually incorrect then or now?
• So you are confirming then that the NRPAI took on the role of an NGB?
• Why are you writing that I'm demeaning practical shooting when all I've ever said was that I didn't want to shoot it myself, but that I thought in regard to any discipline, if it was safe, you should be allowed to shoot it?
• Can you tell us why for two years we were told that disabled shooters would be at said Championships but without being given information like how many there would be, what range equipment they would need, whether or not they needed special assistants for the match, etc, etc?" (as I pointed out above, you didn't answer that one).
• Can you confirm whether or not the PCI list the NRPAI as the ISSF-recognised NGB?
• How many silhouette shooters are you nominating for carding grants this year?
• How much money does FLAG have available to it to cover costs in the event of a case being awarded against it? Has it risen from the amount you quoted to me a year or so ago, which was about a quarter of what would be required (and which was then only promised by unnamed individuals, as opposed to actual money sitting in an account)?
• If you've retired from the committee of the NRPAI and thus are not even appointed to the committee of the NRPAI by people who are voted for by shooters; but are somehow nominated for the post removed from the ordinary members by several layers; how can you be in charge of one of the most risky activities in the NRPAI, which in the event of a loss, could result in the NRPAI incurring losses in the six-figure range?
• In the event of FLAG losing a case and thus incurring costs in that range, how much do the individual affiliate bodies have to pay and where does that money come from?
• Could you explain how stating that if you ever saw specific shooters in a meeting that you'd get up and leave the room rather than work with them, is a helpful attitude that promotes our sport?
• Why, at an NRPAI strategic meeting a few years ago, where the future of the sport was being decided upon (by a non-NGB!) was the Chairman of the NTSA informed by yourself that he had no right to attend the meeting?
• How would you characterise your relationship with the Minister for Justice and the Department of Justice in general?
• What are your plans for the rest of your term as the head of FLAG?
• What is the length of your term as head of FLAG?
• Will you be presenting a report on FLAG's activities, finances and so forth at the NRPAI AGM?
• Why was the agenda published for the last NRPAI AGM not the agenda actually followed, and will this also apply for the next AGM?
• What body ensures the NRPAI will adhere to the written rules it writes for itself?

Or is it the case that if you do enough dodgy things and build up a long enough list of serious questions, that you are allowed duck out of answering them on the grounds that it'd take too long to answer them?

I might add another question to the list, by the way; why would we appoint as our representative liason to the Department of Justice a man who can't even refrain from personal attacks when answering valid questions from one of the association's own members? Is this how you behave in a room with the Minister in our names?

FLAG

Hi Mark, you have never put a serious question to me and wow you are one to accuse someone of providing answers with no information. You create enough hot air to cause a real increase in global warming, and that's during work time.

In any case the debate is closed, still can't get things like this into your head!

I do have one very important piece of current information to close on, the two Man Squad who attended this years Tyrol Open in the last ten days have come back with 5 gold’s, 5 silvers and 5 bronze awards, these are individuals you chose to malign in your most recent response to me with respect to the competence of individuals picked to travel to the Tyrol open in 2004.

Grow up Mark and get off the boards and allow them to be used to promote shooting not destroy it.

Declan Keogh
FLAG sub-committee

Response posted after 17:00 on my own time.

Sparks

Declan,

• You've had several serious questions put to you with supporting documents and references.
• You do not have the authority to dictate that a debate is closed in that manner.
• You continue to allege that I slighted the shooters in the Tyrol Open when anyone who can read can see I did not.
• If you won't provide any further information, consider yourself now subject to the board charter in regard to personal insults and attacks. I've done my best to remain civil; I would have expected no less from you, when you're charged with representing all of us to far more belligerant parties than myself. Thus far, you've come in far below that expectation, despite the many deletions and edits to your posts that you've made in this thread.

FLAG

One of the problems I suppose about dealing with one of the boards moderators is that they can chose when to apply the charter, from what I have read on the boards it should be yourself that you are removing from the boards. Have I been insulting, I do not think so, very irritated yes, angry yes, and tried to resolve your issues yes. Edits are not unreasonable when mistakes have been noted and one post I removed after you called it an insult which I believed was reasonable.

As I have said I will no longer engage with you on these matters and yes I can dictate if I decide to continue or not. I have decided to end this now, you would have had an opportunity to have all your queries answered had you not decided to come back with wave after wave of comment. You cannot even agree to accept other peoples observations about what was said at the AGM in support of my report that an e-mail was indeed read.

Like I said grow up.

Sparks

I'm intending to leave it there. I think your posts speak more elequently against your position than I ever could. Frankly, I didn't expect to learn anything new, you've never answered an important question directly before this, in my experience.

I'll say this, however; those questions remain unanswered, and that is a serious condemnation of the way things are run in the NRPAI.

tireur

Sparks, I think you should run for the job of Chairman of the SSAI. I will act as your campaign manager if you want.

Blackjack

Well, I was going to say "good job you don't keep guns in the house" but I reckon it would be the wrong place to say it.












/me runs of to the safety of a non-weapon related sport/topic.

Vinniew

Working abroad at the moment so not much chance to shoot or view the board. When i did get 5 mins to have a look have to admit I was more than a bit sickened by what I saw.
Well done to all who involved themselves in the preceeding load of crap.
Nice to see that youre not a bit bashful at showing us all what a complete shower of **** you all really are.
Every positive thing you´ve all done have been shadowed by your on-line comments over the last few days.

God help the future of shooting sports in this little island if our governing bodies are populated by **** like you lot.You all complain about the lack of people wanting to get involved and help out on committees etc.
Ever wonder why?????

Get a grip. Work together if you can....offer support and constructive criticism not sniping at each other at every given chance.
What´s at stake, our chance to shoot, compete and enjoy our sport is bigger than all the collected egos here.


Vincent White

rrpc

I agree with you VinnieW, but in all organisations you will always get hidden agendas, people on ego trips and general **** stirrers.

Name me an organisation that doesn't have any or all of the above, and I'll join up immediately

Vinniew

yeah I know what you mean. Just that both parties in this little dumy spittin session have done good work for shooting in Ireland, seems a shame to chuck it all away and it discourages others from getting involved etc.

We have the clay shooters, the issf target shooters and the nasrc boys.....then the practical pistol mob too....all wanting their own bite at the cherry in one form or another.
Cant look good from the governments perspective or anyone elses......sounds a bit like a Monty python sketch.....Peoples popular front etc.


Vinniew
*welease woddewick!*

rrpc

Vinniew wrote:

yeah I know what you mean. Just that both parties in this little dumy spittin session have done good work for shooting in Ireland, seems a shame to chuck it all away and it discourages others from getting involved etc.

Well I should hope it doesn't, the more people involved, the more diluted this kind of thing is.

We have the clay shooters, the issf target shooters and the nasrc boys.....then the practical pistol mob too....all wanting their own bite at the cherry in one form or another.

Everyone has ther own POV based on their particular discipline. There is more than a whiff of p***ing on boundaries inherent in that kind of set up, but it can't be helped, especially since there have been so many changes in the last year. Hopefully it will all settle down to background noise when the new firearms part of the CJB becomes law.

Cant look good from the governments perspective or anyone elses......sounds a bit like a Monty python sketch.....Peoples popular front etc.

Splitters!

FLAG

Sparks wrote:

Declan,
You were sitting at your kitchen table with me, another NTSA committee member, and an NASRC committee member at the 22/4/04 NRPAI committee meeting and you told us that the NRPAI was now a signed-up affiliate to the NRA. Were you factually incorrect then or now?

Mark: Not to re-open the debate but you accused me of not responding to any question you put to me, the question above was responded to and was factually correct, we did not sign up to the NRA on that date or any other date, you are in fact mistaken, we did indeed sign up to the WFSA, on or around the time you mentioned, the WFSA is an important organisation to be a part of and we affiliated as an associate member, we could not afford the $5,000 annual fee for full membership. So in response to your position that I did not answer any question maybe you might reposition yourself on this one, no doubt that you will have some criticism of the affiliation with the WFSA, but there again that is to be expected. www.wfsa.net

http://www.jamesswan.com/WFSA%20Trailer.wmv

Worth a look at.

As indicated above not to rekindle the debate but just to put it on the record that Mark can sometimes be wrong.

Sparks

no doubt that you will have some criticism of the affiliation with the WFSA, but there again that is to be expected.

Of the WFSA themselves, no, not really.
On the manner in which the affiliation was carried out, not a criticism as yet, but a question - who decided to affiliate us? I was at the meeting where the affiliation was announced, yes, but the manner in which you presented the information was curious in that you explained who they were and so forth - but not in a way that suggested it was ever mentioned at the top table beforehand. So when was the vote taken to sign us up to it?

FLAG

For your information, it was indeed discussed at lenght by the committe at appropriate committee meetings and a decision was taken by the council of the association to affiliate, I believe that this is allowed under the rules of the association:
Rule 5: The duties of the council shall include:

to deliberate on all maters put to them.

Affilliation to the WFSA was paid for by a sponsor.

Our affiliattion to the WFSA allowed us to present to the meeting of the WFSA in March of 2005 and highlight our successful re-introduction of pistol shooting to Ireland. Again I stress the benefit of reviewing the WFSA web site.

Sparks

And again I'll point out (since you've ignored me the first time) that I have no specific objection to the WFSA, so reviewing their website wouldn't be an issue. What I was questioning was the process used by the NRPAI to decide to affiliate four seperate governing bodies - and the clubs and individuals they represent - to the one international group, hence my question.

I am curious though - given that that meeting (where you announced our affiliation) was as I understand it the first in over 18 months, when were the meetings where it was discussed? And what was the agreed procedure for signing up to them - by which I mean, what was the timeline for consulting the various different NRPAI groups and what was the procedure in case one of them did not wish to be associated with the WFSA? I ask mainly because I never even heard it mentioned in the several years I was on the NTSA committee. And also because that procedure in general is a rather important one - if one constituent body can be signed up against its will to an international body though membership in the NRPAI, for example, that would be a poor situation, I have no doubt you'll agree; so what are the arrangements in such a situation?

Riggser

Is this a private squabble or can anyone throw a spanner in the works?

FLAG

Sparks wrote:

And again I'll point out (since you've ignored me the first time) that I have no specific objection to the WFSA, so reviewing their website wouldn't be an issue. What I was questioning was the process used by the NRPAI to decide to affiliate four seperate governing bodies - and the clubs and individuals they represent - to the one international group, hence my question.

I am curious though - given that that meeting (where you announced our affiliation) was as I understand it the first in over 18 months, when were the meetings where it was discussed? And what was the agreed procedure for signing up to them - by which I mean, what was the timeline for consulting the various different NRPAI groups and what was the procedure in case one of them did not wish to be associated with the WFSA? I ask mainly because I never even heard it mentioned in the several years I was on the NTSA committee. And also because that procedure in general is a rather important one - if one constituent body can be signed up against its will to an international body though membership in the NRPAI, for example, that would be a poor situation, I have no doubt you'll agree; so what are the arrangements in such a situation?

As I am no longer an official of the SSAI, you should direct your query to them, I can assure you that the meeting you refer to was not the first meeting of the NRPAI in 18 months as you suggest, it is more misinformation being put into the public domain by you to try and demean the work done by the group. As usual your comment is full of words but short on facts.

Sparks

Riggser wrote:

Is this a private squabble or can anyone throw a spanner in the works?

Open forum, open thread Riggser.

Sparks

FLAG wrote:

As I am no longer an official of the SSAI, you should direct your query to them

Okay, hold up there a moment for a sidebar question. If you're not an NRPAI official, how come you're still down as the liason to the Department of Justice and the head of FLAG which is meant to take the Gardai/DoJ to court in the NRPAI's name? I'd say that that was as official as it tends to get in this country...

I can assure you that the meeting you refer to was not the first meeting of the NRPAI in 18 months as you suggest

Actually, I'm not suggesting it, I'm telling you that I was told it was the first in 18 months by the then secretary of the NRPAI (the guy who was responsible for taking the minutes). Or was the NRPAI in the habit of calling meetings without notifying its secretary? And if so, what else did it habitually fail to notify what officers of?

it is more misinformation being put into the public domain by you to try and demean the work done by the group.

So you're denying that there was an 18-month gap where the NRPAI held no official meetings? (Actually, it would have been longer than 18 months - we weren't quorate at the meeting in your house...)

chem

And there off again :rolleyes: tell yea what lads just sort it all out once n for all.

Pistols at Dawn

Rovi

chem wrote:

Pistols at Dawn

Yep, sure looks like them FLAG and Sparks boys is a feudin' again.

With all due respect to the Hatfields and McCoys-



Anyhow, by the time they get licences for those pistols, they'll be too old to remember what the feud was about

.

Just what is this FLAG anyway?

Clare gunner

original_psycho wrote:

Just what is this FLAG anyway?

Firearms Legislation Action Group.

OK,everyone has had a good bitch and moan about various facets of the Irish shooting scene.NOW WHAT????