Sad day for denco unit and wbcci

[Coloradobus]

It is unfortunate that our Unit has one less member today. The creator of our much argued Denver Motion (Forrest's Motion) to allow more involvement in the governance of our club by us members, has QUIT Denco and WBCCI. Yes, Forrest and Patrice McClure have ended their membership completely. So sad!

[Nuvite-F]

That is indeed very sad news.

Ironically, the proposed new constitution could be rejected and Forrest's amendment could yet be passed.
.

[eubank]

Oh, this is really sad!

Lynn

[rideair]

Hey Forrest, start to feel like this guy?

YouTube - Bang Head Here

[mistral blue]

FWIW, I believe Forrest was the true creator of the "proxy" motion that others took credit for as well.

It is my fervent hope that I one day have the privilege of meeting Forrest and Patrice and shaking their hands.

[Buttercup]

I wonder if the leadership of WBCCI will realize just how bad this is for the club...

[wkerfoot]

I am very sad that Forrest and Patrice felt that they had to resign from the wbcci (lower case by intent). They will be missed by many, us included.

Bill & Beth

[Coloradobus]

Originally Posted by Buttercup

I wonder if the leadership of WBCCI will realize just how bad this is for the club...

It's all disgusting. They don't care!

[wheel interested]

Forrest, I am so deeply sorry to hear the news that you have resigned from wbcci but I can totally understand being disenchanted and disgusted with the entire underhanded machinations and self serving tactics of elite leadership and their obstruction of fair play and membership initiatives. I am sorry that your hard work did not come to fruition while you were a member. Your level of commitment was great and we all owe you a debt of gratitude for all your advice and help through the years. It is very sad to see yet another of membership's heroes leave, perhaps one of the last remaining champions of membership rights joining the growing ranks in a long and mournful exodus from the club that once was revered by so many.

[Buttercup]

When someone like me resigns (and I have about 3 times now) nobody notices. But Forrest is a different story. He has been one of the strongest contributer to the WBCCI and the VAC as well as his unit! That is without a doubt.
During the name change BS, he told Kimber that the vote should be challenged with a "point of order", which was met with as "stand down"..... you know how that goes. She said that Forrest was her strength. Now that is gone.... I grieve for the club..... Where will the decline stop?

[Frank's Trailer Works]

When I left the club, I was labeled a "QUITER" by many, (ironically, some of the very same posters now praising Forrest for his actions on this thread) but I felt that being a part of problem was showing my support for problem. I felt leaving was the ultimate sign of not supporting what was currently taking place. Not to speak for him, but Forrest probably came to this same conclusion.

Forrest, I want to commend you for taking a stand. I am sure it was not an easy choice to make. The right choice is often the hardest one to make.

[Solar Stream]

My wife Marty and I had the pleasure of meeting and visiting with Forrest and Patrice McClure at the 2010 Alumapalloza Rally and were thrilled with there enthusiasm and dedication that they had for Airstreaming. The WBCCI has lost a true Airstream couple that put there heart and soul in all that they did.
We hope to reunite with them at the 2011 Alumapalloza and where ever our travels allow us to meet and share our travel experiences.

[Boondocker]

I appreciate all of Forests efforts, but one can't blame him, not really. No matter how noble the fight, when the game is rigged staying in the game makes less and less sense over time as it comes more and more clear nothing will change.

I liken the WBCCI royalty right now to a loved one with a drug habit. To maintain the status quo they will rationalize and do anything required. Watching the downward spiral, I may still love or at least maintain positive feeling because of past times and vague hope for the future. Despite that, being around for the day-by-day, needless destruction and drama becomes too much. The day to day pain, coupled with the hopelessness of improvement until the addict chooses to do otherwise is simply to much of a burden.

I, myself, maintain positive feelings for the club, BUT I cannot support the sickness. For me, giving money to the club right now is analogous to giving a meth addict money and then being shocked that it doesn't go to the rent. I won't do it. When the day comes that the royalty chooses to change or is overthrown (though its hard to see how this happens) I will be delighted to reengage.

I don't want to conflate my thinking with Forest's, I simply don't know what his thoughts were leading up to his departure. Still, all and all, I suspect they were similar at least insofar as balancing personal affections against the futility and distress of seeing what seems to be an unavoidable ending.

[66Overlander]

I hope that this is not true, but fear that it is. Hopefully Forrest will eventually clear this up (or even reconsider, if it is true). Most of all, I hope this decision, if true, was driven by club issues and not due to health or other more serious issues. Forrest was very passionate for this club, getting away may be a good thing for his and Patrice's health.

I know I struggle to remain semi detached from the contentious club issues because I have too much stress on my job to allow myself to compound it with stress from a hobby. We must all find balance.

[Stefrobrts]

I hope they have many happy years of camping ahead of them, without all the politics. I wouldn't blame them a bit.

[xrvr]

Damn, zz

[Lily&Me]

Can't say I'm sorry to hear Forrest has left the WBCCI. I have to feel that this was the right move for he and his wife, and be happy for them that they were able to see the path to take.

We all have to know what we are about, what we believe in and what we want to be associated with. Sounds like they knew.

Good for them. Travel safe.


Maggie

[Coloradobus]

66 Overlander, The McClure departure is true. They departed membership with a note to HQ and our Unit. Reason was Club politics.

[Forrest]

A telephone conversation with the International Treasurer, Bob Moss, finally convinced me that my differences with the Club are irreconcilable. I asked him to verify that almost $30,000 had been spent on legal expenses involving the Defend Wally lawsuit. He put the figure closer to $27,000. I needed confirmation of that for an article I was writing for my Unit newsletter as to why the Proposed Revised Constitution should not be approved.

That led to an argument, and one of the things central to his viewpoint is the belief that the WBCCI is a social club. Over the years, I’ve heard this numerous times, and it explains a lot if you can look at it that way. Airstream becomes only a means to an end with that view, and allowing some other brand of motor home into a social club just isn’t such a “big deal,” in Bob’s words.

It’s a deal breaker for my wife and me. Ten years ago we did not say, “Oh, look at that social club. We really want to be part of that.” No, instead, we saw an Airstream club, and joined solely because we wanted to know more about Airstreams.

However, if we view the WBCCI primarily as a social club, it explains how it has had such things as parades, pageants, contests, luncheons, formal dinners, regimentation, awards, chain-of-command, and social strata. In that venue, an Airstream is just a vehicle marking some vague social status. This is why so often someone with a small vintage Airstream will hear comments about it being “cute,” followed by how, at some point, the owner, “will move up,” to something bigger and better. This applies to the SOB motor home issue too, as was noted in another thread, “they have slide-out envy.”

The Club’s focus on social etiquette is what got Leo G expelled. Both sides know that his expulsion had nothing to do with his violating any rule other than social convention. His refusal to acknowledge the superior social status of the EC7 or IBT or IPP Council, and his noisy incessant attempts to bring them down from those lofty perches are what made him intolerable to them.

Usually, less drastic methods are needed. One strong motivational influence is the promise of position, and keeping friends close, but keeping enemies closer. It is difficult to be critical when you become part of the problem. This is how the Defend Wally civil suit was neutralized, in exchange for a seat on the committee.

The Club’s leadership has proven repeatedly that it is willing and able to manipulate the membership, and are justified in doing so because of their belief that the WBCCI is their club, not ours. It reminds me of something I witnessed a number of years ago. A member of a fraternal order asked one of the officers if he was a, “member in good standing,” now that he had paid his dues. The officer looked at him with disdain and said, “No, you’re just a member.”

Social standing in the WBCCI is paramount. It is more important than numbers, and IPP Jim Franklin was being honest with his notorious statement that the Club should concentrate more on quality members than on quantity.

This indicates that they are quite willing to let the Club lose members and that they will never accept a more egalitarian arrangement.

The EC7 created the Revision Committee, and that committee reported to them. The committee did indeed write the revision to the Club bylaws first, and when that conflicted with the current Constitution, they took it upon themselves to rewrite that. They have told us that the revised constitution is more democratic with its direct voting concept, but I see it simply centralizing power and control with the EC.

The entire package is akin to some of the bills in Congress. It is sometimes referred to as, “logrolling.” It is the practice of combining different proposals, called riders, into a single bill. By doing this, such a bill might win majority support, whereas the riders, if presented as separate bills, would be defeated.

This is an old tactic and opposed to it is the single object rule that many states have to prevent a popular bill from being used to pass riders that are unpopular. “The single object rule is also intended to promote orderly legislative procedure and reduces the potential that legislators will unwittingly enact buried provisions that are extraneous to the general subject of the bill.”

The Revised Constitution Proposal is logrolling, plain and simple. The EC7 know that direct 1M1V is popular, but that changing the name of the Club is not. They know that change is popular, but that leaving the IBT in complete control of the bylaws is not. To maximize the effect, the proposal was kept secret until the last possible moment, and even now, the bylaws that it was written for, are secret. The EC7 knows what is in those bylaws and understands the riders that are attached.

Bob Moss and other International Officers feel that people like me are hurting the Club by the dissension we create. I cannot deny that contentiousness leads to loss of membership. I also understand that we cannot save the Club by destroying it. Never the less, the historical fact is that the greatest membership losses occurred long before I joined. Yet, I have never heard anyone in a position of authority admit that the loss of membership is due to the policies of the EC7, IBT or IPP (with the exception of past Region President Bob Thompson – who was suspended for his comments).

I have no doubt that if, instead, the Club was doing well, they would take credit for that, but not once have they accepted any credit for the decline. Instead, the loss of membership is blamed on others or on other factors. For a while, it was economy, or that the units are not doing their job to recruit. Later, it was the Vintage Airstream Club, then it was Save Wally, but always the blame is put elsewhere.

In so many words, Bob Moss asked me to compromise, and go along to get along for the sake of the Club. Why can’t I just do that? Well, it may simply be that some differences cannot be resolved. I do not want anyone to think that I left because of Bob, or that he’s less for seeking compromise. He’s a good guy, in a tight spot, doing his best to get through. I want to believe that.

After we hung up, it occurred to me though that as long as malcontents such as myself stay, the Club’s decline will be our fault. Yes, you read that right, because if it is our fault, then it is not their fault. Our presence enables the International officers to rationalize that. But if we leave the Club to them (as some of them have said we should), will that save the Club? If it does, will it be a club we want to belong to? Probably not, and either way, leaving seems the only logical way out of the dilemma.

They may be willing to do so, but I do not want to fight forever. One thing that my wife’s stroke impressed on me is that our time is limited. We can’t take it for granted and shouldn’t waste it on vain efforts.

[wkerfoot]

Forrest,

Thank you, how eloquent.

Bill