Membership and Levy proposal Feb 2012

[Gross]

There are 18 pages of discussion on this... the only outcome being that AWK has done a U Turn

To be honest.... a couple of pounds here or there is going to make zero difference to the vast majority of people... I have no idea what the cost of BOF Membership was last year, this year or next year & I don't particularly care....

The AGM is a couple of weeks or so... yipee !!!

All this discussion from my side has acheived is for me to post my proxy form to BOF so my vote is used.... on what...? I don't care !!!!!

[EddieH]

RJ wrote:
"Our level D events have their own rules and guidelines thank you very much!!"

Staggering

[RJ]

Staggering

Yes I know EddieH..... our Rules Group had many discussions over a pint to decide.... course type and lengths, difficulty of the courses, winning times, registration system..... you wouldn't believe how sophisticated they are...... brilliant!..... and all done in volunteer time too!!!

[fleetfoot]

Evidence the electronic timing introduction. WCOC spearheaded the introduction of SI back in 1998/99, holding a sample event in mid summer on Dalegarth (BOC2012!!) at a Cumbrian Galoppen.

Really?! Odd that I have my map from my first SI event on Wisley Common in December 1997 then. An event that was put together as part of BOF's assessment of electronic punching ahead of WOC 99. Isn't it a shame when the facts get in the way of a good story!

[Gross]

WCOC spearheaded the introduction of SI back in 1998/99

I was using EMIT regularly in training camps & test races in 98 / 99.... Elite Test in '98 used EMIT for sure....

[roadrunner]

As I have said several times now..... ALL of the participants who turn up to our level D events will eventually JOIN BOF.

I would suggest that in that case, your club's doing an excellent job: I suspect that with many clubs, a lot of the people who attend level D events won't join.

[greywolf]

http://www.maprunner.co.uk/index.php?op ... Itemid=183

scroll down for key dates

my claim to "fame"- coming second at the May 97 JOK emit trial, one minute behind someone who put half the controls out

PS: mods - new thread for electro-nostalgia?

[RJ]

Odd that I have my map from my first SI event on Wisley Common in December 1997 then. An event that was put together as part of BOF's assessment of electronic punching ahead of WOC 99. Isn't it a shame when the facts get in the way of a good story!

You can't help yourself fleetfoot, can you!!!..... The difference is that following the Dalegarth event NWOA purchased £17k worth of electronic equipment and the following January the start of the Cumbrian Galoppen series at Gelt Woods near Carlisle started the sustained use of SI for the rest of the series and loads of other C3 and C2 events in the region. In fact we loaned gear to other clubs and events for a whole year so that others could make the decision whether to buy or not.

The NWOA clubs and several key individuals in the region introduced the SI system to the sport..... we did something with our test event..... so, we might not have trialled it first..... but we did introduce electronic punching (SI) to the sport in this country.

[Mrs H]

Out of interest

1991: Yvette Hague and Ragnhild Andersen are disqualified at the World Championships for mispunching - an event which directly prompted the development of electronic punching.

presumably this wasn't the first time anyone had mispunched at a Word Champs so what was it about these particular mispunches which prompted the development?

[Gross]

about these particular mispunches

If Nopesport had been on the go then they'd still be 'discussing' it.... Yvette's mispunch is famous... she punched the correct control but the pins were slightly outside the box... so DQ'd. EMIT in Norway followed soon after (ish).... wether or not the WOC mispunches lead directly to the development of electronic punching is debatable... I guess it would have happened anyway...

[awk]

awkThe membership element has been cheapened (not a good idea at all!)

So don't cheapen it then - bump your own membership fees up to make up the difference if you think a high membership fee is a good thing and then.....

The weakness of the changes is that the regular, event planner member, who keeps the sport alive with volunteer input is now expected to pay significantly more through levy. Many in our club will have to find £30-£50 extra each year for NO improvement in their orienteering...... not fair!

.....keep your entry fees the same, and use the extra membership fees to pay that levy. As it effectively says in the supporting blurb, and in my last post, and elsewhere, the levy rate simply sets the amount each club needs to pay British Orienteering. How you raise that money is up to you.

[SteveE]

The BOF website currently states:

Proposal 4 Membership and Levy Structure 2013

The proposed changes to the Membership and Levy Structure 2013 had an outcome of 69.5%

However this does not confirm whether the changes were accepted or not. Anyone present at the AGM like to confirm the result? Thanks.

[Mrs H]

Posted on Thursday 5th April 2012

....and more interestingly how was the item posted the day before the meeting took place - crushed diamond juice?

[lincolnsteve]

Quite clearly, as with every other year, the proxy votes were counted before hand to get the result of the 2 important issues (numbers of attendees will hardly change the vote) and it's obvious the first two items would be passed by a show of hands, so it's quite easy to know the outcome before it happened and post the results the day before. Or BOF screwed up again...

[Electrocuted]

The BOF website currently states:

Proposal 4 Membership and Levy Structure 2013

The proposed changes to the Membership and Levy Structure 2013 had an outcome of 69.5%

However this does not confirm whether the changes were accepted or not. Anyone present at the AGM like to confirm the result? Thanks.

They announced the result and then stated that it needed a 75% vote in favour to pass it so it had failed. Then, someone present at the AGM stood up (sorry, can't remember his name) and stated that as proposal 3 had been passed it only required a 50% vote in favour to pass proposal 4 - had proposal 3 not been passed it would have required a 75% vote. The person who stood up was recognised by the board as 'being the oracle of the articles of association' and so the proposal was passed. Then someone else asked the board to actually look into the position and consider the proposal passed pending confirming the actual position in the articles. I presume they are in the process of doing this.

This was shortly before they awarded the club of the year award to Moravian Orienreers, rather than Mar Orienteering Club