I think only one "national" I think the SOP will have the requisite names copyrighted or what ever its called, if not, they should have.
My post was an explanation for Howard.
SOP AGM.
- Thread starter ploughman61
- Start date
My post was an explanation for Howard.
And you will only hear what you want to.
- Location
- 200 miles N,NW of New York
no I listen to all sides, so its maybe you that only hears what you wantAnd you will only hear what you want to.
Doubtless I will be corrected if found incorrect but nonetheless. I would have though you of all people had the right answer to hand Aitch, with regard to this particular perplexing question. Judging by the amount of time spent on here with your foot in your mouth......you of all people should remember that the reason for the cancellation of the National was Foot and Mouth and not waterlogged ground. I think it was 2001. Your views on this issue go a long way to reinforcing the view currently held by many vintage ploughmen that they are a poor second to the main event.
It would seem that your perception of my view of you holding the middle ground is also incorrect. My actual view is that you seem to think you hold the moral high ground in both camps.
With regard to the SOP being a democratic society then think again. The opposition - or part of it - has been summarily dismissed. Blacklisted no less. Which of course means the SOP actually operates as a dictatorship, a category which most family firms fall into. This is contrary to the aims and objectives, one of which is to promote the skill of ploughing - not self promotion.
Were I Desmond Jenkin, then seeing as first of all his human rights have been violated, and secondly since another Director, also guilty of posting on here, has had his membership accepted, which in no uncertain terms is victimisation, then I would not think twice about seeking recompense. Desmond may well be guilty as charged, the actual charge being ”Pointing out the less than honourable actions of the Executive and their puppet masters” Nothing else
Perhaps the Charity commission should hear of this. After all the electorate have been led to believe the SOP should only have a maximum of 8 Directors - contrary to their (The Charity Commission) model articles which clearly states “there is no upper limit to the number of Directors” Just in passing, the current articles also state that the directors shall appoint an executive “responsible for the day to day running of the society on their behalf” No mention of the Executive exceeding their remit and sacking the Directors. Vindictive redefined. Are there no Directors man enough to stand up to their responsibilities in law?
You would be well advised to back off, leave your mischievous intent in the closet where it belongs, let the SOP do what they do and let any new venture decide accordingly.
Scoresheet already done and well accepted. The current SOP scoring system is a joke - as is ‘general appearance’. Rules can readily be drawn from either European or World factions - added to and adapted accordingly - free of any copyright.
Whilst perfectly acceptable to charge delegates for a lunch, it goes without saying that where a body intends to govern by their rules, then those rules and any information with regard to the implementation of those rules should be freely available to members. It would also seem that in the spirit of the promotion of these rules then the delegates should receive a free lunch. Not available with the current ruling body
We can go on and on, round and round forever, chewing the same old fat. Regardless of your feelings and affiliations, one very very salient point remains. Had the Vintage Ploughing Association had the right leadership and direction, then the SOP as we know it would not exist.
Last edited:
Just about the most honest remark, self contradictory in places and initially slightly selfish perhaps but you set the record straight later. I am really past worrying about a ruling body unless it is a bad one screwing things up and taking the urine. I no longer have any ambitions but I still recognise that we have a great past time and we must put back where we take out as you certainly agree. I just hate to see young blood, when it emerges, faced with the prospect of falling under the current regime.
It is a great pity that a ‘like’ of a particular topic is a one shot deal. Surely we could have. Like. Like it a lot. Bloody brilliant. Amazing! Wow
Last edited:
Just one thing, No one was dismissed. Memberships had lapsed.The refusals were related to the acceptance of new members, applications which could be accepted or rejected.
The SOP existed before vintage ploughing became popular, and could do so again. I have explained how easily it could meet its core requirement. Does it really matter if it was rain, foot and mouth,the fact was a qualifying event was held, and the two competitors places claimed.
Moral high ground? If you wish to feel that way, I prefer to try to pick the good bits from both sides.
The sad fact is, without the carrot of a world, or European championship,( It is likely that the SOP will remain the officially recognised body in world and European eyes) any breakaway group will have no product to interest sponsors, they will exist as a living museum, and maintaining interest in such a body will be far from easy.
The SOP existed before vintage ploughing became popular, and could do so again. I have explained how easily it could meet its core requirement. Does it really matter if it was rain, foot and mouth,the fact was a qualifying event was held, and the two competitors places claimed.
Moral high ground? If you wish to feel that way, I prefer to try to pick the good bits from both sides.
The sad fact is, without the carrot of a world, or European championship,( It is likely that the SOP will remain the officially recognised body in world and European eyes) any breakaway group will have no product to interest sponsors, they will exist as a living museum, and maintaining interest in such a body will be far from easy.
Last edited:
You've lost the plot entirely. What was the intent? Did others, and there must have been many in the same situation, receive the same treatment? You have already said the SOP does not need members and now you are suggesting, as I would, that they do not deserve them.
Stop it off now Harry and get real. Their membership was refused plaIn and simple. Both had a letter defining their past transgressions. Desmond had a whole litany of his posts on here. John had to suffer a character assassination at the recent AGM A heathen decision at best considering their contribution to both the running and the funds of the SOP.
Possibly a good time to repeat and embellish. Vindictive redefined - with hangers on.
Not to put too fine a point on it but both John & Desmond’s membership was still current at the last AGM according to the articles of association. Renewal was refused. The reason given to both were ‘their past actions’ As far as John goes perhaps you missed the bit about the Executive deciding this in their absence - despite it being the responsibility of the Directors.
How do the SOP react to you having your foot in their mouth as well as your own?
Last edited:
Petetheploughman
Member
- Location
- The West Country
A society/\club needs in my opinion, a reasonable membership price sending newsletters around four times a year (but can still make a small profit), to hold it's own national plough off with reasonable entry fees (but can still make a profit), and hold training sessions for free to members that are lead by somebody who ploughs at national level and is willing to volunteer and spend time with members. Most importantly of all it needs to be run by warm, lovable, non stuck-up, trustworthy characters who are there for the love of ploughing and not the money. The society/club must be there to care for the ploughmen and the future of match ploughing. I personally think just ordinary commercial ploughing does not have a bright future as more and more farmers believe in keeping cultivation to a minimum to save time and money due to rising costs, but that's another can of worms. I just want everybody to be treated the same and fairly so nobody is put off by the political side of things.
Are you receiving messages from above Harry, because it looks like someone is pulling your strings? If you wish to be taken seriously I suggest you stick to facts other than those fed to you by by zombies.
Bob, there were 45 prize winners at Taunton, all using kit which would be accepted as vintage, competitors who any new body will need, if standards are to be maintained. Is it really wise to compare them with pigs? And in doing so, are you not guilty of awarding the same amount of respect as that which you feel you receive from the SOP?
You are confusing the succession issue, you know, the one that led to a challenge from five directors and ultimately exclusions with prizes for ploughmen. Remember?
I think that, being paid up members, competing in a SOP event could lead you to think "does not care" would be a description. You have said that those of this grouping are happy living in a pig sty.
I nearly gave up but perhaps you deserve better. Nepotism is the assumption or seizing of power by a family and close associates by non democratic means . Either you agree that this should be challenged or you don’t or you simply don’ t care and are happy to exist in a metaphoric pig sty.
However, we are all going around in circles, this unpleasantness is endemic in anything vintage,for example, the National Vintage Tractor and Engine club has spawned at least two breakaway groups down here, both of which failed. The inter counties ploughing group were initially vintage orientated, they failed.
A veritable mine of information Aitch. Puppet masters working overtime or is this rent in anticipation? Exacting knowledge freely dispensed from Doncaster?
Unkind to the vintage faction to say the least. Rather than picking the good bits from either side, you seem more adept at picking the bits which you are either fed or think you will win the most brownie points. It is you - not Bob - who is comparing them with pigs. It is you who is insulting them by saying revolt is endemic within their movement. Bob is describing - and if I might make so bold - the situation which exists within the SOP - or to be exact, how a large proportion of people see the framework which currently exists. Never forget Harry - most of us in dissent with the SOP are not members of any vintage body.
Just in passing - the qualifying dates which define vintage / Classic do not match between NVTEC and SOP.
Last edited: