Problem with IBT Amendment No. 1

[dufferin]

bryan,
reading your post make me think that it is just a joke...
On top of that as Buttercup said "you still never come right out and say if you are for or against" the amendment.
If you are really serious, try to convince me and the other with arguments in favor of that change.
For me it's easy... just tell me why current and next 4winds MH owners would join the club more than current and next AS trailers owners.
May be there is a thousand good reasons in favor of that amendment, but so far I don't even see one. Bring me some light (BTW I asked the IP the same question and never get any answer back. May be it does't worth it to educate a ignorant as I am)
thank you.

[Coloradobus]

Hey brian,

Why would a Four Winds coach owner join the WBCCI over the Four Winds CLUB???? Why would a Mandalay Coach ower join WBCCI over the Mandalay Club. Both Motorhomes have their own respective Clubs. Guess the IBT thinks they will be more attractive to Four Winds/Mandalay than the Four Winds and Mandalay Clubs. That's thinking mighty high of themselves.

[bryanl]

If you are really serious, try to convince me and the other with arguments in favor of that change.

The question for folks to consider is whether challenges such as this or other such methods of 'debate' as shown in the posts in this thread represent the personality they prefer in a camping group. Is this the way you talk to friends around a campfire? Really?

And, for challenges like this, the question has to be asked: Who is it that needs convincing? What is the best way to convince them? Or is your goal something other than trying to educate others about the wisdom of your viewpoint?

My point is that the challenge is to try to bring others into the fold and the strident and acerbic language with the personal attacks and innuendo is not very productive for doing that.

For example: if the following were directed at you, would you feel sympathetic towards the speaker's point of view or would you tend to feel hostile? If you were new to the situation and overheard this kind of talk at a campfire, what would be your impression of the group that seemed to accept such methods of dialog? Is this really the way to win friends and influence people? ( sycophant alert: think carefully before contributing to my point - again! )

Another fine Leipper Lecture. I can see your apparent animosity ... I am equally impressed at your ability to further cloud and obfuscate ... What rock did you just crawl out from under ...

The purpose and intent of these forums is to convey information yet this seems to impugn just such efforts (e.g. lecture). That should raise questions.

Then there is the 'apparent animosity' which is a false perception that should also raise questions. (why not find out first, rather than presuming?)

Then there is there is the personal labeling - again, rather than deal with the issues I raised, it is talk about the person. I raised some 'facts' that could be discussed. Rather than deal with those, the forum is treated to this catalog of personal attributes. What do you think is a better approach, patiently clarifying issues, resolving facts, and creating a picture of the issue - or - impugning someone's style and their character?

What is the goal? To convince people of the importance of the WBCCI identity and what it means to them or to vent one's feelings and create discord that causes doubt about what you are really after?

never mention your thoughts at the misinformation coming out from regional and even IBT leadership. Why do you not point out things like the IBT inflating motorhome owner numbers in the club...

This provides an excellent example of propaganda. The allegation is "misinformation" yet the support is only an innuendo. That innuendo is to imply one's personal preferences will corrupt one's ethics - again, delving into character rather than issue and behavior and with very negative presumptions.

A proper means of argument would show that "inflating motorhome numbers" was indeed done and as a matter of malfeasance rather than incompetence. It would also show that any such conclusion about the census of members was relevant to the point at hand.

While I think such a census may address a point raised in favor of polluting the WBCCI identity, I do not think it is at all pertinent to the basic identity question at hand. It is a diversion based on the false conclusion that membership quantity is paramount. IMHO it would be better to make the case that there is benefit to quality of membership rather than quantity and that the census of RV types is irrelevant on that account.

Creating 'facts' and pretending they are relivant will only serve those who are already sold or are easily sold. For others, they create skepticism about the remainder of the arguments made.

you apparently have an axe to grind on SaveWally - but you should pull the twig from your own eye. Maybe then you also will see that this issue is not about SaveWally, but protecting the history and heritage of the WBCCI.

The axe I have to grind is about saving the primary purpose of the WBCCI. That is what is cited in its Constitution as 'outdoor fraternization" in a manner described in its code of ethics. That is the substance of the club.

What I see the in the savewally.org effort is a corruption of the substance to promote an image, an image that is in many respects imaginary. Its sponsors do not talk about camping. They do not illustrate inclusive, tolerant, or civil behavior towards those with differing views or ideas. They do promote issues centering on names and identity, advocate an image not based on actual experience, and advocate symbolic changes in procedure.

Without the substance, the image means nothing and it becomes an empty shell. Empty shells collapse. Both substance and image are needed and one cannot be sacrificed for the other.

[dufferin]

I asked you one simple question to convince me. Why? simply because I am not the one who came out with that idea of non-AS MH.
Can you tell me why I am wrong in being against that amendment?
it is not a challenge or whatever you call it, I ask for your help.
Again I started to talk about that change in late december, but I could have missed some point. And I don't buy what the IBT says regarding the benefit for membership.
If you don't answer to my questions, I have, and sorry about that but it is not my fault, to presume that you can't...
BTW what do you mean by "quality of membership"

[Buttercup]

Again - still yet another fine Leipper Lecture. And if I say that, it is for good reason because that is what you are doing. The entropy of your messages is so high - lots of words with little meaning conveyed.

Still yet no answer to the questions as to your position - and I am not surprised because you has not ever answered a question, only deflected your answers to focus attention off yourself and on to someone or something else. I believe that is because you are aware of just how ill informed you are on the topic. Your post couint is going up though.

Bryan, while you are waiving the constitution and bylaws around, the WBCCI may just dissolve around you. And you will never see it coming. But someday you will be the leader of its ashes.

[Alumatube]

Jim Elmlinger said, "I also find it hard to believe that out of all the hundreds of people that became first time owners of a new Airstream in 2006, over 90% of them said that, I would like to join WBCCI, but, lets see, IF I get involved and happen to become a Unit President, then attend an International Rally and the Unit President’s Appreciation dinner, where I would have towear a coat and tie, NO I don’t think I will join WBCCI. Somehow I have a hard time with such scenario, I think it is more likely people are not joining because they do not want to make a commitment, which seems to be one of the themes of our societies current philosophy."

I would like to say: Jim, I am one of those "hundreds." I am now 40 and I have spent years as involved member, vice-president and president of several clubs and organizations from college to car clubs, and have recently been president of my local water board. I have volunteered and spent my time and paid my dues for sure--you cannot say I won't make a commitment.

I am a recent new Airstream owner and I am NOT going to join the WBCCI.

I do not want my enjoyment of my special marque motorhome be compromised by being forced into strict regulations and dress codes (and I do believe you exaggerate when you make it sound like you have to become very politically advanced and attend a once-annual event to have to wear a coat and tie.)

I am with JimGolden in his post #56. Amen, Jim.

My idea of traveling and camping in our (MADE BY) Airstream motorhome is to revel in its uniqueness, share that uniqueness with others, and be entranced by my surroundings, trying to learn something new from every place I visit. That enjoyment has no room for regulation wear, flag nazis, teen queen contests, sterile concrete pads or the like. (Okay, I would probably wear an Airstream polo shirt with my jeans or khaki shorts.) In my mind, camping/caravanning enjoyment is to share the things that you do/enjoy/have issues with as you camp, and activities related to such. I want to explore my surroundings, hike, bike, tour, antique shop, sight-see, and come back to camp to the beauty and coolness that is my shiny aluminum travelodge. If I want a bingo game with 600 other people, I can go to the Lion's Club here in town. Formality was very appropriate for clubs in the 50's and 60's, but the leadership needs to have a look out the window of their golden tower and see that the world has changed around them while they worked out the perfect height and angle for a trailer flag.

The whole thing is quite simple, really. Those who enjoy the formality and regulations and leadership shenanigans of the WBCCI will stay and see the club disintegrate around their ears while they cheer on their teen pageant choice. Or, they will be enjoying their nightly game of cards with owners of any ole' type of camper (once the club devolves completely), who also enjoy the same recreational pursuits. The rest--oh, they'll be out learning just how long it took to carve Washington's nose on Mt. Rushmore, or assisting a new owner with details on upkeep, or taking in the sheer beauty of that Big Sky sunset, or happily answering an aficionado's questions at a gas station, or settling in for the evening around the campfire with six other Airstream owners with a Crock Pot full of chili and some tall tales.

Please try again. I think you are shortchanging the club and yourself by wearing the rose-colored spectacles. They apparently also need a good polish.

Susan

[66Overlander]

Originally Posted by Leipper

As savewally.org has demonstrated, winning one argument is just not enough for some folks. It seems they live for arguing. Win an argument means finding another, loosing an argument means fanning the flames. This is politicing - not "outdoor fraternization."

Originally Posted by Leipper

What is being objected to, in fact, is just this tolerance. The plain fact is that the organization (savewally.org) that was formed to prevent a name change has now morphed to prevent yet additional organizational change. And, in protesting this change its participants are accusing the WBCCI of being anti-change. ("new ideas ..are squelched..")

Originally Posted by Leipper

What I see the in the savewally.org effort is a corruption of the substance to promote an image, an image that is in many respects imaginary. Its sponsors do not talk about camping. They do not illustrate inclusive, tolerant, or civil behavior towards those with differing views or ideas. They do promote issues centering on names and identity, advocate an image not based on actual experience, and advocate symbolic changes in procedure.

Bryan,
I believe you are practicing the same intolerance that you preach against. You have lumped all SaveWally participants and supporters in a group and dismiss them as a group. This is a bad practice. SaveWally is the product of contributions of many people who have varying opinions and methods of communication. You cannot lump us all together. If you have a difference of opinion with one or more people that you associate with SaveWally, please make your comments to them and not about SaveWally as a whole.

At Savewally, there are current and past Unit and Intraclub officers that are making comments and contributions. We all get out and participate in "outdoor fratenization". SaveWally was working on several positive ideas for improvement of the WBCCI before the latest club wrenching initiative came down from International Leadership. When that happened, priorities changed. You cannot expect members to go along quietly when our leadership proposes ideas and makes motions that go against the 50+ year history of the organization. When those types of changes are proposed, I think it natural to expect heated debate, and this is exactly what the Four Winds motion has generated. This is natural.

If you support the Four Winds motion, say so. If you don't support it, say so. If you have a difference of opinion with the way some individuals express their opinion on this issue, please point your comments toward those individuals. Stereotyping all others that do not support this motion as malcontents because of your differences with one or two individuals is not a good policy.