Ok, cliff notes of our "meeting".
Chuckles wanted to know what I wanted to see ROAV do in the next year. Of course, my first question was, "why not ask this to your membership?".
Chuck's response was kind of snotty, and still left me confused. He said, "we don't have to talk to you at all. You're not a member. But I am interested to hear what you have to say. Will we bring everything you talk about back to the board meeting? No. But if you do have some legitimate concerns, then yes, we're willing to listen and talk about it at our board meeting(s). But believe me, a lot of board members think this meeting was a bad idea".
So, I give Chuck the credit for at least taking the time to hear people out. Christina, too.
So Chuck's first question was, "What do you want to see ROAV change or do?"
I told Chuck and Christina that I think the Bylaws need to be reviewed as they're not written very well. For example, the voting process. It's not the membership who votes on issues - it's the BOD's - and when you have a group of BOD's that have been friends for the last 15-years, of course they're going to agree with each other and not "change" the way things have been done. That's why these folks have been dubbed "the good ol boyz". They've been there forever and keep that old skool mentality - well, this is the way we did it back in 1983 so that's what we're going to do today...
So my point was, I don't care that Mike McCrag or Paul P., or Mike Mason, or Robert Davis are BOD's for ROAV - but allowing them to hold all the power in the club is bullshit.
Chuck claims that you can override the BOD's vote at any time by a majority vote.
This is true. But if you look at the Bylaws and follow that process, it will never happen. It takes 25% of the membership to request a "special meeting". Chuck did not know how many ROAV members there were right off the bat without looking, but lets say it's 250. That means 63 members would have to be gathered to call for a special meeting. Thing is, 200 of the 250 members of ROAV join only for MAR. So tracking down and/or contacting 63 members to over-ride a decision will never happen.
Bottom line, what the BOD's decide is final and there's nothing you can do about it.
I then got into Ethics. My main beef was with John Tackley and him accessing my personal information via the ROAV roster and posting that information to the Internet. That was bullshit. My question was, why was Tackley not removed from his position for doing this?
Chucks response was not very good. He danced all around the question and never gave me a satisfactory answer.
I told Chuck I filed a complaint with ROAV. I sent an e-mail to all of the BOD's plus the ROAV President. The only response I received was from the President (James), and it basically said, "fuck you".
I asked Chuck if this was appropriate for a ROAV BOD to do? Of course, Chuck said "no". So again I asked, why was nothing ever done? Chuck did not have an answer and tried to push the blame onto other BOD's because Chuck was "new". Fuck that.
So I asked if he understood where I was coming from on the Ethics part. When a ROAV member, or director, does something fucked up like this, there needs to be a guideline as to what's going to be done about it.
Chuck agreed.
Chuck then asked, "what do you want us to do about Tackley?"
I told Chuck that it's too late for that now. I'm not a member and I'll never be a member as long as Tackley is a BOD.
Chuck stopped me, and said, "no, what do you want to see us do about Tackley? I'm sitting right here in front of you asking you this question. If you don't tell me now, I'll just think you want nothing done."
I again told Chuck this was over a year ago, and asked why nothing was done THEN. I then went on to say that if this happened yesterday, I think ROAV should have called a meeting, discussed what Tackley did, agreed that it was fucked up, and then dismiss Tackley from the Board. I again explained that I filed the complaint, and nothing was done.
Other things were said, and we were right back at the 25% of the membership could call a special meeting bullshit.......
We then talked about James Dearden and I asked what was being done about that (Pearls Pond). I went on to explain that this was a fucked up, unethical thing, too, yet James gets voted to the BOD's.
Chuck admitted he did not know the full story on James and him being at Pearls Pond but he would look into it. So we'll see where this goes. Anyone want to make a guess?
Then we got into MAR.... And the Cove.... And money..... And bullshit.....
Chuck claims that he had no clue that ROAV told me to book the Cove. Again, Chuck was "new". But to me, that was not an excuse. The Good Ol Boyz knew, and they're the ones who call the shots anyway.
Today, I sent Chuck all the e-mails between me and ROAV's BOD's about MAR and the Cove. He has yet to commit about it. I doubt I'll hear anything more about it. It just proves that I was right in my oppositions on Dweb, and he's not going to admit to that. No one in ROAV will. But really, I could care less about that. That's over and done.
We talked about a lot of other things, but that was the highlights.
Christina asked, "what will it take to have you join ROAV".
I told them that the day Tackley is removed as a BOD, I will re-join ROAV.
Chuck asked me what I was going to do to get Tackley removed.
I reminded Chuck that I was not a member and there was not much I could do. I do not agree with the way ROAV handeled this, and I was not going to support an organization that puts up with this type bullshit.
He asked me, "so you don't care about James?"
I told them that I did not know the whole story about James, but everything I've heard smelled like shit. That did not involve me personally, but I told them that I surly hope that ROAV was not going to put up with fucked up shit like that, if the rumors were true. Again, Ethics, especially from a BOD or staffer.
All-in-all, I think it went well. Chuck asked me to not blast him on the Internet, and I told him that I was not going to agree to that and that if I saw him, or ROAV, fucking up, I would be calling their bullshit. Chuck claimed that was not fair, blah blah blah.... But I think he knows what I'm saying. I'm not going to flame him for no reason, there will be reason involved.......just like with the Cove and MAR, even if Chuck claims to not know the real story with that. I did not blast ROAV "just because", and I *think* he sees that now.
Anyway.
