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

ATI

135678

Comments

  • #62
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    Any movement in the area yet????????????


  • #63
    muffler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46,879 ✭✭✭✭muffler


    A couple of comments:

    smashey sent an email to the IATGN but has yet to receive a reply as far as I know but Im sure he will post here when he has some news.

    Yes IATGN are more than aware of this forum and they were invited a long time ago to interact but didnt take up the offer at the time.

    Theres been a lot of comments flying around about open and honest debate etc etc. and I really cant see why its being constantly mentioned. None of the mods here will have any problems or restrict anyone from engaging in such type of discussion/debate but we are mindful of past events when certain unfounded accusations were made which resulted in an amendment being made to the charter.


  • #64
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    muffler wrote: »
    A couple of comments:

    smashey sent an email to the IATGN but has yet to receive a reply as far as I know but Im sure he will post here when he has some news.

    Yes IATGN are more than aware of this forum and they were invited a long time ago to interact but didnt take up the offer at the time.

    Theres been a lot of comments flying around about open and honest debate etc etc. and I really cant see why its being constantly mentioned. None of the mods here will have any problems or restrict anyone from engaging in such type of discussion/debate but we are mindful of past events when certain unfounded accusations were made which resulted in an amendment being made to the charter.

    It is a positive move by Smashey.

    I don't see the problem with a call for open, honest debate. When you only hear one side of the storey it is subjective at best. You need open, honest debate in order for third parties to form opinions on the validity of an argument. Accusations can only be unfounded if they are not challenged and found wanting. This forum is young and a lot of the posters are posting virgins. However, I have not read anything that I would call 'unfounded accusations', maybe misinformed, inexperienced comments.

    I look at the busiest thread in this area 'job losses in Architects offices' and wonder what if we had done things differently. I look at the RIAI who are pushing to protect and support Architects in this difficult time. Will technician's ever be able to gain the ground, respect and standard of professionalism that has been built up over the last ten-years or will it be lost due to inactivity and poor governance?

    I'm sorry if i continually ask the same questions, but to date i have not received an answer. I watch colleagues and friends loosing their jobs and ask could we as a community have managed this situation better. Again, all those questions remain unanswered because there is a fear of open and honest discussion. When secrecy prevails only certain people have all the information, making it difficult for others to understand.


  • #65
    muffler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46,879 ✭✭✭✭muffler


    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    I don't see the problem with a call for open, honest debate...........You need open, honest debate in order for third parties to form opinions on the validity of an argument..........because there is a fear of open and honest discussion.
    This is exactly what I alluded to earlier - the number of references being made about "open honest debate". Why is this phrase or these words being bandied about to no ends? I dont get it at all. Are you saying that we dont have that here? And why the "fear"?
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    When you only hear one side of the storey it is subjective at best. You need open, honest debate in order for third parties to form opinions on the validity of an argument.
    What one side of what story are we hearing from who? And who are the third parties you refer to? Again Im at a loss to know what you are trying to say here.

    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    Accusations can only be unfounded if they are not challenged and found wanting. This forum is young and a lot of the posters are posting virgins. However, I have not read anything that I would call 'unfounded accusations', maybe misinformed, inexperienced comments.
    Take my word on it. There were indeed very serious accusations made but that was in the past and Id prefer to look to the future.
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    Will technician's ever be able to gain the ground, respect and standard of professionalism that has been built up over the last ten-years or will it be lost due to inactivity and poor governance?
    Maybe we are all a little bit at fault here.
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    I'm sorry if i continually ask the same questions, but to date i have not received an answer.
    What questions exactly have you asked and who did you ask? Again maybe Im missing something.

    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    Again, all those questions remain unanswered because there is a fear of open and honest discussion. When secrecy prevails only certain people have all the information, making it difficult for others to understand.
    I dont think I will even comment on that.

    Dont think that I am dismissing what you have to say. We are after all on the one side and in the same position here. Its just that I would like to see a bit of clarity in the posts rather than leaving things up in the air.


  • #66
    Slig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,550 ✭✭✭Slig


    I think it all comes down to this.

    We need to see a member of the ATI committee on here


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    Slig wrote: »
    I think it all comes down to this.

    We need to see a member of the ATI committee on here

    I am conscious of not upsetting someone/ group and have gone about what Slig have put into a single sentence in a round about way. Sorry for the confusion.


  • #68
    No6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,489 ✭✭✭No6


    Slig wrote: »
    I think it all comes down to this.

    We need to see a member of the ATI committee on here

    I agree, they badly need someone who will post on behalf of the organisation (if only to keep us loud mouths quiet!!:D) The impression I get from all the posters here is that they are in the main supportive of the IATGN and the ATI but are very anxious about the lack of meaningful communication from them, it's the not knowing that is causing the trouble. I know a number of IATGN / ATI people and I know everyone involved is working very very hard on their own time to set the whole thing up, I know they are not intentionally secretive they just don't have the time to post on Boards!!


  • #69
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    No6 wrote: »
    I agree, they badly need someone who will post on behalf of the organisation (if only to keep us loud mouths quiet!!:D) The impression I get from all the posters here is that they are in the main supportive of the IATGN and the ATI but are very anxious about the lack of meaningful communication from them, it's the not knowing that is causing the trouble. I know a number of IATGN / ATI people and I know everyone involved is working very very hard on their own time to set the whole thing up, I know they are not intentionally secretive they just don't have the time to post on Boards!!

    I think you might be generalising. I also know a number of IATGN / ATI people. I would say that some of them do Trojan work while there are others who do little. The problem is which of the two different groups are directing the group? Without communication how can we right this imbalance?


  • #70
    No6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,489 ✭✭✭No6


    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    I think you might be generalising. I also know a number of IATGN / ATI people. I would say that some of them do Trojan work while there are others who do little. The problem is which of the two different groups are directing the group? Without communication how can we right this imbalance?
    You should contact those you know directly and ask pseudo tech.


  • #71
    RKQ
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,292 ✭✭✭RKQ


    I fear posting here as I have been banned before for expressing an honest opinion. In fact I was banded for 7 days, before christmas, for quite a positive post.

    Here are my own honest opinions, hopefully we can debate the following points:

    Why do the National Committee claim to represent us yet refuse to talk to us?:eek:

    Why do I feel obliged to say "I'm not anti-IATGN" before I feel comfortable discussing this issue?

    We must be honest and ask does the ATI/IATGN exist? We had a email before Christmas and an email two weeks ago.

    Its nearly two years since we had a Regional meeting and nearly 3 years since we voted a National Committee in the RDS!

    Two years since IATGN organised a CPD.:(

    I sent emails everyday - that doesn't make me a hard working national committee committed to representing anyone. An email takes one person afew minutes to write. Organising events or answering "offers of Help" takes time but we know the reply - "Don't ring us we'll ring you"

    How can we work together if we don't know what needs to be done? I don't want to start working on a certain element that may or may not have been resolved by the National Committee. Like the railway - there has been alot (of great work) done and alot more to do!

    Did IATGN have a stand at Plan Expo in 2008?

    There are hard working and very busy individuals in CIAT that are well able to post on this forum. Fair play to them. They have not refused to answer our queries.

    The IATGN have been well aware of this Forum, as I have informed them. I can guarentee this. However They are not the only ones I have made aware of our difficulties.

    Look at IBCI, a small national group with a relatively simple qualification / membership requirement. Set up for Council Technicians & Engineers - recognised by all the Banks!!! Why couldn't IATGN be recognised by that Bank, when IBCI was? ( IBCI are public sector workers!:confused: )

    What exactly did IATGN Chairman do regarding Certification for "that" Bank?
    The IATGN web page alludes to some sort of progress but is very slim on actual facts or figures.:confused:

    Why? oh! why? do we think we are being represented by a group that refuse to speak to us? They will ignore Smasheys email because they have nothing to say.:eek:

    Maybe we need to think about this and remember the story "The Emperor has no clothes!";)


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    I have!!


  • #73
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    RKQ wrote: »
    I fear posting here as I have been banded before for expressing an honest opinion. In fact I was banded for 7 days for quite a positive post.

    Ditto.
    RKQ wrote: »

    Why do the National Committee claim to represent us yet refuse to talk to us?

    At this stage they don't represent me. I feel everyone got caught up in the momentum at the beginning. Ask Technician's what they want now and it will certainly be different from then. I would certainly be questioning credentials now.
    RKQ wrote: »

    Why do I feel obliged to say "I'm not anti-IATGN" before I feel comfortable discussing this issue?

    Ditto. It seems like it's presented as an us v them, whilst that is certainly not the case. If we can create an impression that someone is out to bring us down, we will deflect attention away from what we are or are not doing.
    RKQ wrote: »

    We must be honest and ask does the ATI/IATGN exist? We had a email before Christmas and an email two weeks ago.

    I feel it do. However, in what form i don't know.
    RKQ wrote: »

    I sent emails everyday - that doesn't make me a hard working national committee committed to representing anyone.

    I have to agree.
    RKQ wrote: »

    I sent emails everyday - that doesn't make me a hard working national committee committed to representing anyone.

    Agree.
    RKQ wrote: »

    How can we work together if we don't know what needs to be done? I don't want to start working on a certain element that may or may not have been resolved by the National Committee.

    I have raised the very same question.
    RKQ wrote: »

    There are hard working and very busy individuals in CIAT that are well able to post on this forum. Fair play to them.

    Again, I agree> I believe that we should support the CIAT fully as they are the real deal.
    RKQ wrote: »

    The IATGN have been well aware of this Forum, as I have informed them.

    I think everyone is aware of that at this stage, so why they decide to keep silient, I don't know.

    RKQ wrote: »

    What exactly did IATGN Chairman do regarding Certification for "that" Bank?
    The IATGN web page alludes to some sort of progress but is very slim on actual facts or figures.

    What was done in general or about the Bank issue specifically?
    RKQ wrote: »


    Why oh why do we think we are being represented by a group that refuse to speak to us? They will ignore Smasheys email because they have nothing to say.

    I certainly don't want to be from now on.
    RKQ wrote: »

    Maybe we need to think about this and remember the story "The Emperor has no clothes!"

    Is there something you want to twllus????


  • #74
    RKQ
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,292 ✭✭✭RKQ


    I truely believe that as a group, we have more in common that unites us than divides us. (We being all that post here and were trained as AT's)

    The Emperor has no Clothes -I have been a great supporter of the IATGN. I can not now continue to support a group that ignores my concerns. There comes a time when you see something is broken, try and fail to fix it and have no alternative but to move on.... I hereby formally end my membership of the IATGN.

    I feel it is time to move on and make progress. I will look into joining the established bodies CIAT, CIOB, RIAI etc. I'm a well educated, highly experienced individual with self respect. Its time we all moved on.

    I can not be a member of a group that refuses to talk to its members - an ocassional "email" is not enough. In democracy, all leaders must listen to their members or voters. If they can't talk to us then they can't represent us.

    Best of luck to the IATGN and all its patient members. I hope it works out for ye all. I wish the ATI well. I don't have the time to wait so I'm going to be proactive and move on.

    If anyone of you wants real progress as a member of a Professional body then I advise you to move on too before its too late.

    Membership of a recognised body is already a requirement - if you are not a member of a recognised body then it is affecting your business / employment prospects!:eek:


  • #75
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    RKQ wrote: »
    The Emperor has no Clothes -I have been a great supporter of the IATGN. I can not now continue to support a group that ignores my concerns. There comes a time when you see something is broken, try and fail to fix it and have no alternative but to move on.... I hereby formally end my membership of the IATGN.

    I was too. Who said 'If you continue to do the same thing, the same way, expect the same results'. They don't want to know.
    RKQ wrote: »
    I feel it is time to move on and make progress. I will look into joining the established bodies CIAT, CIOB, IBCI, RIAI etc. I'm a well educated, highly experienced individual with self respect. Its time we all moved on.

    I am preparing my POP record as we speak. However, we should never throw the baby out with the bath water. If they [IATGN] are willing to communicate and look for a mandate from Technician's, I for one will row in behind. However, if they don't I would feel foolish, blindly supporting a group of people who show me such discourtesy.

    RKQ wrote: »
    I can not be a member of a group that refuses to talk to its members - an ocassional "email" is not enough. In democracy, all leaders must listen to their members or votes.

    Have to agree. Maybe they feel they don't have too?
    RKQ wrote: »
    Best of luck to the IATGN and all its patient members. I hope it works out for ye all. I wish the ATI well. I don't have the time to wait so I'm going to be proactive.

    It will work out in the end. The question is will it be too late?
    RKQ wrote: »
    If anyone of you wants real progress as a member of a Professional body then I advise you to move on too before its too late. Membership of a recognised body is already a requirement - if you are not a member of a recognised body then it is affecting your business / employment prospects!

    I agree. However, I live in hope for an Irish organisation, but I feel despondent and let down.


  • #76
    WhatsTheStorey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18 ✭WhatsTheStorey


    What is the Story??????????


  • #77
    smashey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,676 ✭✭✭✭smashey


    WhatsTheStorey wrote: »
    What is the Story??????????
    You tell us.

    Right guys, I did send an e-mail but it wasn't for a few days after my initial post. I invited them to register and address your concerns and sent them a link to this thread in particular. As soon as I hear anything back, I'll post it here.


  • #78
    muffler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46,879 ✭✭✭✭muffler


    RKQ wrote: »
    I fear posting here as I have been banned before for expressing an honest opinion.
    Let us be clear here. There was no honesty in any opinion you expressed but there was plenty of malice. You were banned in the past for making unfounded allegations and slanderous remarks about me. The only reason you have posting privileges now is the fact that you subsequently acknowledged you were in the wrong and apologised - an apology I accepted. Now I wanted to move on from all of this but you appear more interested in dragging it up again.
    RKQ wrote: »
    In fact I was banded for 7 days, before christmas, for quite a positive post.
    You and pseudo-tech were both banned on 1/11/2008 for blatantly ignoring a moderators instructions in a thread. Other people who posted in that thread had the good sense to heed the warning but both of you continued to post and in doing so showed your contempt of the forum, the mods and the others who contribute here.

    On a general note I fail to see why you "fear posting here". Its all very simple really. If you post in accordance with the forum charter and the general rules of boards.ie then there is nothing to be "feared".

    I am doing my best to promote this forum and as some of you would know there are ideas to further strengthen and develop it. But I am damned if I am going sit back and allow anyone to drag up old issues from the past and give a very slanted and twisted view on them. I have no wish to carry on debating this matter any further RKQ but if you feel the need to then you may either PM me or start a thread in the help desk expressing your displeasure at the sanctions imposed on you last year and also your "fear of posting" now. Whatever you decide to do dont derail this thread by any further off topic comments.
    RKQ wrote: »
    Here are my own honest opinions, hopefully we can debate the following points:

    Why do the National Committee claim to represent us yet refuse to talk to us?:eek:

    Why do I feel obliged to say "I'm not anti-IATGN" before I feel comfortable discussing this issue?

    We must be honest and ask does the ATI/IATGN exist? We had a email before Christmas and an email two weeks ago.

    Its nearly two years since we had a Regional meeting and nearly 3 years since we voted a National Committee in the RDS!

    Two years since IATGN organised a CPD.:(

    I sent emails everyday - that doesn't make me a hard working national committee committed to representing anyone. An email takes one person afew minutes to write. Organising events or answering "offers of Help" takes time but we know the reply - "Don't ring us we'll ring you"

    How can we work together if we don't know what needs to be done? I don't want to start working on a certain element that may or may not have been resolved by the National Committee. Like the railway - there has been alot (of great work) done and alot more to do!

    Did IATGN have a stand at Plan Expo in 2008?

    There are hard working and very busy individuals in CIAT that are well able to post on this forum. Fair play to them. They have not refused to answer our queries.

    The IATGN have been well aware of this Forum, as I have informed them. I can guarentee this. However They are not the only ones I have made aware of our difficulties.

    Look at IBCI, a small national group with a relatively simple qualification / membership requirement. Set up for Council Technicians & Engineers - recognised by all the Banks!!! Why couldn't IATGN be recognised by that Bank, when IBCI was? ( IBCI are public sector workers!:confused: )

    What exactly did IATGN Chairman do regarding Certification for "that" Bank?
    The IATGN web page alludes to some sort of progress but is very slim on actual facts or figures.:confused:

    Why? oh! why? do we think we are being represented by a group that refuse to speak to us? They will ignore Smasheys email because they have nothing to say.:eek:

    Maybe we need to think about this and remember the story "The Emperor has no clothes!";)


  • #79
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    smashey wrote: »
    Right guys, I did send an e-mail but it wasn't for a few days after my initial post. I invited them to register and address your concerns and sent them a link to this thread in particular. As soon as I hear anything back, I'll post it here.

    Thanks for the clarification Smashey. Keep up the good work.


  • #80
    RKQ
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,292 ✭✭✭RKQ


    muffler wrote: »
    Theres been a lot of comments flying around about open and honest debate etc etc. and I really cant see why its being constantly mentioned. None of the mods here will have any problems or restrict anyone from engaging in such type of discussion/debate but we are mindful of past events when certain unfounded accusations were made which resulted in an amendment being made to the charter.

    Why did you bring up the past? PM sent.

    I have no intention of discussing the past. I have always given my honest opinion. I have never posted with malice - such an accusation is totally unfair, unnecessary and unjustified.


  • #81
    Poor Uncle Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,547 ✭✭✭✭Poor Uncle Tom


    Sheeeezs, you go away for a couple of days and blood is almost spilled.:rolleyes:

    Just shows how emotive an issue this is.

    I haven't seen any smoke and mirrors stuff or cloak and dagger stuff here I am not afraid to post my opinion here, that is why I sometimes put IMO after some posts just to reinforce this. I'm not afraid to ruffle some feathers either, my sense of humour isn't to everyones taste, but so what, I'm not changing so get over it.

    I do, however, believe that left to their own devices the committee at the IATGN/ATI will make progress and will achieve their aims. I for one believe that, and I wont give them stick for it. Until then, and it could be a while, I will chose another path for my representation.

    Regarding AT's and Boards.ie, well where else can you ask a question and within a short time get 4, 5 or 6 comparisons from around the country from posters you've come to recognise and respect?

    Anyway didn't Munster do well against France yesterday...!


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    I haven't seen any smoke and mirrors stuff or cloak and dagger stuff here I am not afraid to post my opinion here, that is why I sometimes put IMO after some posts just to reinforce this. I'm not afraid to ruffle some feathers either, my sense of humour isn't to everyones taste, but so what, I'm not changing so get over it.

    I feel the fear of posting is varied. Firstly, you will find that some posters have never posted on this forum, prior to the Arch-Tech one been put in place. I for one still need clarification on what i can and cannot say and for that i have to thank some of the moderators for their assistance. It can be frustrating. Secondly, the use of the term fear is related to the NO response from the IATGN to converse with the Architectural Technician community. A fear to engage, a fear to be questioned. If you have nothing to fear, come and discuss issues with the posters. Clarify ambiguities etc.
    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    I do, however, believe that left to their own devices the committee at the IATGN/ATI will make progress and will achieve their aims. I for one believe that, and I wont give them stick for it. Until then, and it could be a while, I will chose another path for my representation.

    In order for you to be this content, with leaving the committee to their own devices, you must either have an inside track or you have a blind faith. If you know something that others don't, you may understand why the posters here are soo frustrated. If however, you have a blind faith, I don't know what to say to you. How can you believe in a group that was not democratically elected, a group who's credentials and experience in these matters no one knows about. However, performance to date makes me want to question those areas even more.

    I agree with you that the IATGN will succeed with time. However, if the IATGN were more efficient and professional who is to say that it could not be done quicker? If they take too long, they will miss out. We have a professional community who are loosing their jobs and the RIAI are trying hard to protect Architect's. Do you think that when thing pick up that we will be in a better position or worse?

    You have decided to choose another way to achieve representation until the IATGN have their house in order. Elaborate for all the others on this forum if you don't mind sharing your insights. I as mentioned previously am preparing my POP record for membership of the CIAT. I feel that if accepted, why should I look for further representation.
    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    Regarding AT's and Boards.ie, well where else can you ask a question and within a short time get 4, 5 or 6 comparisons from around the country from posters you've come to recognise and respect?

    I couldn't agree with you more. However, the reason why this forum is in place because the IATGN decided to close theirs down. Not wanting to be questioned.


  • #83
    Poor Uncle Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,547 ✭✭✭✭Poor Uncle Tom


    pseudo-tech are you on some kind of witch hunt? I really don't understand the full motivation behind your post.
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    I feel the fear of posting is varied. Firstly, you will find that some posters have never posted on this forum, prior to the Arch-Tech one been put in place. I for one still need clarification on what i can and cannot say and for that i have to thank some of the moderators for their assistance. It can be frustrating.
    I'm sorry pseudo-tech I don't have an idea what you're on about. Are you about to make a statement of such immensity that it could shut down boards. What are you afraid to say?
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    In order for you to be this content, with leaving the committee to their own devices, you must either have an inside track or you have a blind faith. If you know something that others don't, you may understand why the posters here are soo frustrated. If however, you have a blind faith, I don't know what to say to you.
    It has to be 'either or' does it? Either I'm 'one of the tainted' or I'm too stupid to know better. Well I'm not one of the committee of IATGN/ATI and I don't have any insider information. I do however remember reading on the IATGN web site that things could take up to 5 years to set up the ATI. If the committee are working to this time frame then there is nothing I or you can do to change that.
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    How can you believe in a group that was not democratically elected, a group who's credentials and experience in these matters no one knows about. However, performance to date makes me want to question those areas even more.
    If you feel like this , walk away, start a representative body yourself, join another group, there are plenty of options.
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    ....the IATGN will succeed with time. However, if the IATGN were more efficient and professional who is to say that it could not be done quicker? If they take too long, they will miss out. We have a professional community who are loosing their jobs and the RIAI are trying hard to protect Architect's. Do you think that when thing pick up that we will be in a better position or worse?
    When things pick up in all aspects of this profession, nobody, whether a part of a representative body or not, will be in a better position then they were 12 months ago. Having a representative body is not a magic cloak that envelops all in the profession and protects them from professional harm or decline.
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    You have decided to choose another way to achieve representation until the IATGN have their house in order. Elaborate for all the others on this forum if you don't mind sharing your insights. I as mentioned previously am preparing my POP record for membership of the CIAT. I feel that if accepted, why should I look for further representation.
    No insights, same as you CIAT.
    pseudo-tech wrote: »
    .....the reason why this forum is in place because the IATGN decided to close theirs down. Not wanting to be questioned.
    I'm sure you know some members of the committee, as I and most people do, go and ask anyone of them face to face about progress or lack thereof, I'm sure you will get a far better response then posting here for any of them to respond to.


  • #84
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    pseudo-tech are you on some kind of witch hunt? I really don't understand the full motivation behind your post.

    Witch Hunt? Fantastic, sensationalist and certainly over the top. Why? If you have nothing to hide, why not answer questions.
    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    I'm sorry pseudo-tech I don't have an idea what you're on about. Are you about to make a statement of such immensity that it could shut down boards. What are you afraid to say?

    Again, having taking the time to respond to my post, your use of words blow me away. 'Are you about to make a statement of such immensity that it could shut down boards.' What are you on about. As mentioned in the post, both I ans others have made posts that breached the forum charter and at times I certainly require clarification on what i can and cannot say. However, If I want to sit on the fence and make meaningless posts, I suppose i don't need to worry.
    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    It has to be 'either or' does it? Either I'm 'one of the tainted' or I'm too stupid to know better. Well I'm not one of the committee of IATGN/ATI and I don't have any insider information. I do however remember reading on the IATGN web site that things could take up to 5 years to set up the ATI. If the committee are working to this time frame then there is nothing I or you can do to change that.

    Again 'one of the tainted'. What are you on about. A cheap use of words really. There is no way anyone can change what is happening if the IATGN are not willing to listen to advise being offered by all posters on this forum. Surely, you understand that it don't need to take 5 years?
    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    If you feel like this , walk away, start a representative body yourself, join another group, there are plenty of options.

    As mentioned previously and noted in your response, I am currently preparing my POP record for membership of the CIAT. However, I feel that if something can be done to make the IATGN more effective, I will continue to comment.
    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    When things pick up in all aspects of this profession, nobody, whether a part of a representative body or not, will be in a better position then they were 12 months ago. Having a representative body is not a magic cloak that envelops all in the profession and protects them from professional harm or decline.

    However, if we don't have an effective representative body in place, we will not be in a position to protect Architectural technician's from legislative changes like the Building Control Bill.
    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    I'm sure you know some members of the committee, as I and most people do, go and ask anyone of them face to face about progress or lack thereof, I'm sure you will get a far better response then posting here for any of them to respond to.

    It's starting to sound like parish pump politics. If you don't know a member of the committee, you are not worthy to hear about progress. I the holder of information, puts me in a position of undeserved authority. If they posted here, then all Technican's would know what is going on. Stop using the school yard tactics, childish really!


  • #85
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,945 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    to pseudo-tech...

    compose an email of your questions.....

    email to info@architecturaltechnology.ie.....

    wait a couple of weeks and get your response.



    communication is two way.
    I, in the past, complained about the lack of communication, but since then have privately emailed the above address and at all times i have recieved a response.


  • #86
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    Sydthebeat, I take on board your comments. I have asked questions in the past and was either given no answer or an unsatisfactory one, normally to disguise the inactivity. However, I don't understand why the committee are unwilling to discuss questions where every technician will benefit from the response. Whats wrong with that? By keeping correspondense on a one-to-one basis they can decide how much information that will pass on, again un-questioned.

    Look if they don't want to talk to people thats fine, but it needs to be exposed for what it is.


  • #87
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,945 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    the forum that was on the IATGN site was working perfectly fine until posters started posting against that forums rules and using pseudonymes... these posters were generally forceful in their attempts to unsettle and disrupt the debates going on.

    why would the committee now come onto a forum where every memeber uses pseudonymes?
    If a poster is not willing to ask questions using his/her real identity (as happened on the other forum), then it is not inappropriate to consider their agenda as being less that true.

    Theres no way a committee member will come on here to debate anything, because of the way the other forum went..... in the words of Mr C... get real...


  • #88
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    the forum that was on the IATGN site was working perfectly fine until posters started posting against that forums rules and using pseudonymes... these posters were generally forceful in their attempts to unsettle and disrupt the debates going on.

    why would the committee now come onto a forum where every memeber uses pseudonymes?
    If a poster is not willing to ask questions using his/her real identity (as happened on the other forum), then it is not inappropriate to consider their agenda as being less that true.

    Theres no way a committee member will come on here to debate anything, because of the way the other forum went..... in the words of Mr C... get real...

    From what I can recall, committee members were using pseudonymes and breaching their own rules. By disrupting the debate are you talking about asking questions that, they did not want to answer. It is important to remember that everyone that takes part here and on the old IATGN site are doing it for the good of the entire Technician community.

    I would suggest that the IATGN should approach this forum like the CIAT did. The moderators here are fair and will respond to a post quickly if they feel that it is out of line. Therefore, you are not looking at like-with-like.

    I don't know who Mr. C is?????????


  • #89
    Slig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,550 ✭✭✭Slig


    This is getting heavy, so I think its about time somebody brought out the really important questions. If ATI does eventually materialise (I am certain it will but uncertain as to what it will be) how will we identify ourselves as members. For CIAT it would be:
    Dip arch.tech MCIAT
    To follow the same reasoning, for IATGN would it be: Dip arch.tech MATI?
    Would this just feed the public perception that we are all pirates?


  • #90
    RKQ
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,292 ✭✭✭RKQ


    I agree. As soon as something was said that the Committee didn't like a new Pro Committee poster using pseudonymes, would appear and attack everyone for asking a simple question.

    Didn't a new poster suddenly appear here, 1st time poster, pro committee.... where did he/she go?

    ATI will eventually suceed. If they won't talk to you do you think they can talk for you?

    Nice one Slig! Its a fair point MATI! (wheres the gold?) IMO Things like this should be discussed.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    pseudo-tech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭pseudo-tech


    RKQ wrote: »
    I agree. As soon as something was said that the Committee didn't like a new Pro Committee poster using pseudonymes, would appear and attack everyone for asking a simple question.

    Obviously!!!
    RKQ wrote: »
    Didn't a new poster suddenly appear here, 1st time poster, pro committee.... where did he/she go?

    As above
    RKQ wrote: »
    ATI will eventually suceed. If they won't talk to you do you think they can talk for you?

    Fully agree, that they will succeed at some time and I will certainly be both delighted and proud. But, how much will be lost due to the learning curve.

    'If they won't talk to you do you think they can talk for you?'

    I really cannot add to that.
    RKQ wrote: »
    Nice one Slig! Its a fair point MATI! (wheres the gold?) IMO Things like this should be discussed.

    That's not an option, unless you sing from the single page hymn sheet!!


Advertisement