[TheForge] Re: ABANA ANABA

[Grover Richardson]

-----Original Message-----
From: On Behalf Of Demon Buddha
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:37 AM
To: theforge@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [TheForge] Re: ABANA ANABA

>	Let's be clear.<snip>  I'm not an expert in the affairs of
running 
>such organizations

	Neither am I<G>.  But anyone who runs a business knows enough to
have a rudimentary understanding, which I suspect you have more than
sufficient for the task<G>.

By the way, the email was directed in general to all who just want it
all to stop<G>, not specifically at you.  Just that specific email
piqued interest<G>.

>Given that it is all mutually contradicting, everything cannot be true,

>in all likelihood.  Are people lying?  Is it just a matter of honestly 
>differing perceptions?  Is there a power trip thing going on?  I don't 
>know, and I suspect that unless I am willing to spend time and effort 
>that I cannot afford, I would never find out.

So, to me the best thing is to keep an ear to the ground and let those
who have a vested interest find out, and listen<G>.

The truth likely lies in the middle.  Each side has an axe to grind.
Unfortunately, in humans, who one believes is telling the truth
generally lies in who is best friends with who.  However, sufficient
facts should sway the wary.

>My point is that things should never have gotten to this stage in the 
>first place.

Absolutely.  But periodically they do, for many reasons.  This isn't
like a local "club" where everyone can sit around one table and sort it
out for themselves.  The distances, time, and the mass of organization
(or lack thereof<G>) hampers real efforts of both sides.  And mskes it
downright bothersome for the "uninvolved<G>."

>Perhaps it was eventual when this many people and that much money come 
>into question.  But we have been running NJBA for about six years now 
>and have experienced none of this nonsense.  We stick to our bylaws, 
>don't play games with the little money we have (not suggesting ABANA 
>is), and keep the art, science, practice, and education of black 
>smithing first and foremost when we plan and execute our events.  
>Perhaps this is the difference, I do not know.

Personally, I do believe that that IS the difference. With all due
respect, I suggest (politely) that NJBA has not grown to titanic
proportions.  And if it has, has still (somehow) retained the "small
club" organization and methodology.  That it is not a business, but
instead a group of people who are acting businesslike, and putting on
the best conference that they can put on.  Have you ever seen deals made
with handshakes?  Also, with the SERC, a different person is in charge
each event.  In fact, a different group (of the notorious 7-I had to
poke fun here) puts on the event.  Due to this changeover, it's very
hard to have consistency (though it occurs), but it also guarantees that
power is temporary.

>The simple fact that these issues exist and have not been put to rest 
>in TWO YEARS PLUS indicates that there's something way wrong. Either 
>the board is up to something they ought not be (whether it is financial

>or simply matters of power and who's running the ship) or a large 
>proportion of the membership has taken far too much LSD with the 
>morning coffee and is imagining things.

Sounds like something that I would write, except Irish Cream is better
with coffee in the morning.

>Even if there have been major errors, so what?  No need to hang people 
>by the thingies if they made honest mistakes.

Everyone makes mistakes.  However, it's how one behaves when one is
found, that measures the temper of the metal<G>.

>If there is something more serious going on, then a real problem 
>exists.  Likewise, if the Board has been responsive (and I don't really

>know how to tell if they have been, pardon my ignorance of such 
>affairs) then the membership should stop flogging the dead horse and 
>let things be so we can all get back to doing what we're here for.

Well stated!! However, there is a simple problem with that.  Responsive
is a relative thing.  I can ask my wife to respond to my requests, but
her response may be merely "next year."  That is a valid response, and
technically totally fulfills the requirements of interaction.  However,
it does nothing to fix the problem<G>.  If I am skilled in diplomacy,
the next time I ask for a response, I will phrase the question better,
in order to get a more meaningful response, which is,,, shall we say,,,
more useful<G>.  Along a similar vein, legislation requires action; but
not results.

>If ABANA is going to devolve into just another run of the mill, 
>politically fueled hack organization, then what's the point of having
it?

Even under those circumstances good may be had.  Bad people and bad
organizations can help the art; though it is politically incorrect to
state such things loudly<G>.  In this I talk philosophically, and am NOT
saying that anyone in ABANA is bad, nor that ABANA is a bad
organization.  It's just carrying the thought to a logical conclusion.
Actually, I don't think that ABANA is bad, just changed from what I
understand to be it's original configuration and outlook.  But that is
another discussion, unrelated<G>.

Look at Clinton, the scandals, and the "good" that he did for the people
while he was in office.  He's a demi-god to his followers, who take the
scandals in stride.

>And this doesn't mean the Board is necessarily at fault.

Agreed.  But the board is in the best position to scrutinize the
situation and make any changes (if necessary-just giving thought to
everyone involved here).

>My suggestion is let us choose: either settle the issue to the 
>satisfaction of the membership or retire the organization.

There are those of us who still remember the War of Yankee
Aggression<G>.  Yes we lost.  But after their victory, did the north
stop doing what they were doing which caused the war?  No.  So, though
the issue was settled to the satisfaction of all involved (ha), nothing
really changed.  Some folks still remember.

>Anything in between is a waste of peoples' time.

Somewhat.  Depends upon which side one is on (or if one is standing on
the middle of the fence seriously trying to keep their balance)<G>.

>So far, we have been smack in between and I find myself weary of it.  I

>feel ABANA is worth keeping, but only if we dispense with the Peyton 
>Place histrionics.  It's so embarrassingly juvenile.

Certainly I would like to see "a satisfactory and quick solution," but
the appearance is that this will not be forthcoming.  Certainly, after a
while the unhappy individuals will tire and leave.  But this solution is
less than satisfactory<G>.

>	One question that I will ask, which I don't recall having seen
	before (and forgive me if it has already been asked) is: If
	switching publishers for the Ring was to save $25K/annum, was
the
	precise means by which this savings was to be achieved outlined
	to the Board and the membership?  I'm just curious about this
	because, being ignorant of such things, the prediction has a bit
	of a clairvoyant flavor to it.  Just wondering. 

Me too<G>.

As the Brits say, All the Best.

Good statements!!