If you read my posts with more than the care and attention you seem to be displaying at present you will see that a) I've always been careful to state that any views I express are my own and b) I've suggested to Gavin Frankland several times that he does precisely that.eden wrote: ↑Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:18 pm What I would like to know is why is a person not on the LCGB committee doing the negotiations for LCGB?
Surely this situation leaves any negotiations open to being denied as official communication by the LCGB.
Odd way to go about negotiating something the LCGB say they are passionate about.
If I was Gavin I would insist I spoke to someone with an official position on the committee rather than someone the committee can later say had no official capacity to negotiate on their behalf.
Name change- British Lambretta Owners Association Club
-
Nic
- registered user
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:51 am
- Location: New Forest, Hampshire
- Contact:
Nic you are funny.... I wasn't referring to you lol
I wasn't referring to discussions on this or any other forum either... Nic read Gavins posts... One name that's ommitted from his communications with LCGB in his 1st post is stated in a later post.
That person isn't as far I'm aware on the committee now as he had to step down a few years ago due to unacceptable behaviour. I'm sure you you can work it out.
That person isn't as far I'm aware on the committee now as he had to step down a few years ago due to unacceptable behaviour. I'm sure you you can work it out.
-
timexit17
- registered user
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:01 pm
- Main scooter: GP 225 Extra S type
- Contact:
Eden I think we all know whom Gavin was referring to when he was discussing who 1st passed on ideas & suggestions to the LCGB committee.
I find myself agreeing however that had Gavin spoken directly to at least a member of the committe rather than going through intermediaries (as influential or as helpful as they might be) this could all now have been cleared up some time ago.
I note on BLOAC/BLOCs facebook page that there are still some statements being made that differ from the facts however, but that is always going to be the case when you've banned everyone who could possibly set the matter straight.
However I am sure that if anyone of those reading the page wanted to find out the facts for themselves they wouldn't have too far to go.
I find myself agreeing however that had Gavin spoken directly to at least a member of the committe rather than going through intermediaries (as influential or as helpful as they might be) this could all now have been cleared up some time ago.
I note on BLOAC/BLOCs facebook page that there are still some statements being made that differ from the facts however, but that is always going to be the case when you've banned everyone who could possibly set the matter straight.
However I am sure that if anyone of those reading the page wanted to find out the facts for themselves they wouldn't have too far to go.
You still don't sound like you know who I'm talking about.
Is Martin Weeks on the committee again now?
Is Martin Weeks on the committee again now?
Gavin J Frankland wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:39 am Yes. Number 1 was from the LCGB or Martin weeks. I did really want there names out of it, but as it's getting confusing the security will add confusion. Number 2 yes that's the new wording. Number 3 there will be 2 different badges, the other will be on stationary and memorabilia, pennants etc. The one you would have seen is the Facebook, web site, cloth and do on.
To add club is trying to keep it as it was, but as a name change that was requested. Remembering we have many original members that didn't want to join the LCGB in 1965. So trying to keep all happy is a tall order.
Such as?timexit17 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:38 pm
I note on BLOAC/BLOCs facebook page that there are still some statements being made that differ from the facts however, but that is always going to be the case when you've banned everyone who could possibly set the matter straight.
However I am sure that if anyone of those reading the page wanted to find out the facts for themselves they wouldn't have too far to go.
-
Nic
- registered user
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:51 am
- Location: New Forest, Hampshire
- Contact:
Sorry Eden, I thought you were referring to me. Let's dispose of the conspiracy theories. No, Martin Weeks is not on the committee.
You know that. But from time to time, those who have particular skills or knowledge may be asked to carry out specific tasks for the Club. I've been asked to provide support in relation to insurance stuff, for example.
My understanding is that Weeks has helped to collate some of the historical information which the LCGB is required to provide as evidence of its claim, which no-one seriously disputes now, over the assignment of the copyright of Mike Karslake's imagery and designs to our Club. He has been assisted by many other LCGB members who have provided additional material to the Club.
In relation to the specific discussion last week, which Gavin Frankland refers to, we know precisely what happened, partly because a big chunk of it took place on FB last weekend. Another senior member of the Club entered into debate with GF, at the end of which he suggested they talk.
The other senior LCGB member has also helped us/Weeks with additional material. So he naturally contacted him and relayed the outcome of his conversation with GF to Weeks, who in turn passed it on to the committee.
The committee came back and said GF's proposal was not a goer. This was passed back by Weeks to the other LCGB member, who relayed it to GF.
If this all sounds convoluted it's because it is. The solution is simple: instead of GF speaking to everyone and anyone or spouting off on here, he can just pick up the phone and speak to people who are directly authorised to negotiate.
If he wants any specific committee member's number, I would be happy to help out.
You know that. But from time to time, those who have particular skills or knowledge may be asked to carry out specific tasks for the Club. I've been asked to provide support in relation to insurance stuff, for example.
My understanding is that Weeks has helped to collate some of the historical information which the LCGB is required to provide as evidence of its claim, which no-one seriously disputes now, over the assignment of the copyright of Mike Karslake's imagery and designs to our Club. He has been assisted by many other LCGB members who have provided additional material to the Club.
In relation to the specific discussion last week, which Gavin Frankland refers to, we know precisely what happened, partly because a big chunk of it took place on FB last weekend. Another senior member of the Club entered into debate with GF, at the end of which he suggested they talk.
The other senior LCGB member has also helped us/Weeks with additional material. So he naturally contacted him and relayed the outcome of his conversation with GF to Weeks, who in turn passed it on to the committee.
The committee came back and said GF's proposal was not a goer. This was passed back by Weeks to the other LCGB member, who relayed it to GF.
If this all sounds convoluted it's because it is. The solution is simple: instead of GF speaking to everyone and anyone or spouting off on here, he can just pick up the phone and speak to people who are directly authorised to negotiate.
If he wants any specific committee member's number, I would be happy to help out.
-
timexit17
- registered user
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:01 pm
- Main scooter: GP 225 Extra S type
- Contact:
I know who I am talking about and I didn't mention any committee member.
There are several things on the FB page but the word 'copyright' is being banded about incorrectly for a start.
As far as I am aware Gavin hasn't applied for copyright on anything.
There are several things on the FB page but the word 'copyright' is being banded about incorrectly for a start.
As far as I am aware Gavin hasn't applied for copyright on anything.
I've now learnt who the other "senior" member is.Nic wrote: ↑Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:33 pm Sorry Eden, I thought you were referring to me. Let's dispose of the conspiracy theories. No, Martin Weeks is not on the committee.
You know that. But from time to time, those who have particular skills or knowledge may be asked to carry out specific tasks for the Club. I've been asked to provide support in relation to insurance stuff, for example.
My understanding is that Weeks has helped to collate some of the historical information which the LCGB is required to provide as evidence of its claim, which no-one seriously disputes now, over the assignment of the copyright of Mike Karslake's imagery and designs to our Club. He has been assisted by many other LCGB members who have provided additional material to the Club.
In relation to the specific discussion last week, which Gavin Frankland refers to, we know precisely what happened, partly because a big chunk of it took place on FB last weekend. Another senior member of the Club entered into debate with GF, at the end of which he suggested they talk.
The other senior LCGB member has also helped us/Weeks with additional material. So he naturally contacted him and relayed the outcome of his conversation with GF to Weeks, who in turn passed it on to the committee.
The committee came back and said GF's proposal was not a goer. This was passed back by Weeks to the other LCGB member, who relayed it to GF.
If this all sounds convoluted it's because it is. The solution is simple: instead of GF speaking to everyone and anyone or spouting off on here, he can just pick up the phone and speak to people who are directly authorised to negotiate.
If he wants any specific committee member's number, I would be happy to help out.
Hilarious. I'm sure no one who knows who it is would argue that he has a huge alteria motive for wanting to destroy what Gavin is trying to do, especially the museum Gavin has planned.
Senior lol. That made me smile.
What I can't understand is that you Nic are putting the owness on Gavin to call the committee directly yet it isn't Gavin who has a problem... Surely the committee could contact him dirrectly their selves rather than having all these senior moments putting their 2 pence worth in.
It's farcical it really is.
-
Nic
- registered user
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:51 am
- Location: New Forest, Hampshire
- Contact:
You need to catch up Eden.
The individual concerned supports the LCGB 100% in its determination to defend the BLOA name and it's heritage. He's not only told me personally during a long phone conversation AND messaged me to say the same. His comments in support of the LCGB formed part of a long thread on Facebook which he initiated last weekend. Check it out. And I know precisely what information he's passed on to the LCGB. It comes from his own extensive collection of memorabilia.
As for your second point, a number of your friends - or are they just sockpuppet accounts? - are fond of telling people that GF is acting in the spirit of blessed compromise. I don't see it meself, but I'm biased, of course. So what more splendid evidence could GF provide than by picking up that phone? Wouldn't it provide fantastic ammunition against cynics like me?
The individual concerned supports the LCGB 100% in its determination to defend the BLOA name and it's heritage. He's not only told me personally during a long phone conversation AND messaged me to say the same. His comments in support of the LCGB formed part of a long thread on Facebook which he initiated last weekend. Check it out. And I know precisely what information he's passed on to the LCGB. It comes from his own extensive collection of memorabilia.
As for your second point, a number of your friends - or are they just sockpuppet accounts? - are fond of telling people that GF is acting in the spirit of blessed compromise. I don't see it meself, but I'm biased, of course. So what more splendid evidence could GF provide than by picking up that phone? Wouldn't it provide fantastic ammunition against cynics like me?