Registry of Ex Military Land Rovers

REMLR General => REMLR - News => Topic started by: Phoenix on May 29, 2012, 01:08:15 PM

Title: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on May 29, 2012, 01:08:15 PM
I've started up this thread to disseminate REMLR Inc news to all and sundry. So watch this space for news regarding AGM's and so on.

Meetings from AGM's as well as a list of committee members can be found on the remlr.com website at the below address.

http://www.remlr.com/remlr-inc.html

Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on May 29, 2012, 01:09:56 PM
The bank account for REMLR was set up today finally.  It is a westpac account that is fee free.  Details can be found on the Shop page of REMLR, or the incorporation page of REMLR.

http://www.remlr.com/remlr-inc.html (http://www.remlr.com/remlr-inc.html)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: THE BOOGER on May 29, 2012, 04:21:53 PM
Thanks Phoenix,
is this one of the things that will get the old forum info avaliable again :) I know there were several things listed at the last agm?
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Vixen on May 29, 2012, 06:12:43 PM
The bank account for REMLR was set up today finally.  It is a westpac account that is fee free.  Details can be found on the Shop page of REMLR, or the incorporation page of REMLR.

http://www.remlr.com/remlr-inc.html (http://www.remlr.com/remlr-inc.html)

So REMLR has been incorporated for what? 18 months (probably closer to 2 yrs) now, and you've only just set up a bank account? So, this begs the question as to where the membership money that has been paid has gone, have records been kept etc etc etc. I honestly feel Phoenix, that you should fill everyone in on exactly what is going on (or what should have been and hasn't). It just sounds to me like things haven't been done properly, and as result have possibly put REMLR in jeopardy. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way and unless you tell us, we will all just be left drawing our own conclusions........ and what is the problem with explaining to us all just what is going on (it's like pulling teeth ..........  :o)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: d@rk51d3 on May 29, 2012, 07:29:30 PM

So REMLR has been incorporated for what? 18 months (probably closer to 2 yrs) now, and you've only just set up a bank account? So, this begs the question as to where the membership money that has been paid has gone, have records been kept etc etc etc.

I'm 99.99% sure that these details were made available periodically over the last couple of years, on the REMLR forums when hosted by AULRO.
Would be nice though to have (more) regular updates on the financial standings (etc) of REMLR made available.

Something to work towards.  8)
 
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: THE BOOGER on May 29, 2012, 07:47:30 PM
A financial statment was presentd at both the AGM,s I was one of those who seen and signed them, there was no problems with the funds but having a separate account will help stop accusations. :-[
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tommy on May 29, 2012, 08:01:25 PM
The bank account for REMLR was set up today finally.  It is a westpac account that is fee free.  Details can be found on the Shop page of REMLR, or the incorporation page of REMLR.

http://www.remlr.com/remlr-inc.html (http://www.remlr.com/remlr-inc.html)

What happens once a registrant has paid his/her $5.00. Does he/she receive a receipt and subscriber confirmation?

I only ask this as I would like to pay my $5.00  :).

Is there any reference on the forum (under the username for example) that indicates whether user is a registrant or subscriber? Where does 'member' come into play now?

Does $5.00 cover all expenses or will this amount need to be increased?
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: The ho hars on May 29, 2012, 08:11:48 PM
Hi everyone,

The new bank account has been set up and will be working properly shortly.

When things pan out I will accept multiple years membership @ $5.00 per year, so 4 years will be  $20.00.

I will officialy put a thread when this happens, I do ask however you send an e-mail to treasurer@remlr.com so I can send a receipt, please put your forum name in your deposit info.

Mrs hh :)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Mick_Marsh on May 29, 2012, 08:57:26 PM
Ya wanna post that again? Just in case we missed it.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: hodgo on May 30, 2012, 07:23:00 AM
You know what, REMLR Inc. fees are less than I spend on coffee every day of the year, while I believe we do need good governance and transperancy with the books, the $5 we get totalled over the couple of dozen voting members is not a value anyone, and particularly Richard would want to lose a reputation over.

It's good that we have a REMLR bank account, now we need to move on and keep this great resource active and available.

Diana
[/quote

======================================================================

   I could not agree more with what you say, love or hate Richard he has far to much to loose for the sake of a few dollars.

Hodgo
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on May 30, 2012, 10:47:32 AM
So REMLR has been incorporated for what? 18 months (probably closer to 2 yrs) now, and you've only just set up a bank account? So, this begs the question as to where the membership money that has been paid has gone, have records been kept etc etc etc. I honestly feel Phoenix, that you should fill everyone in on exactly what is going on (or what should have been and hasn't). It just sounds to me like things haven't been done properly, and as result have possibly put REMLR in jeopardy. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way and unless you tell us, we will all just be left drawing our own conclusions........ and what is the problem with explaining to us all just what is going on (it's like pulling teeth ..........  :o)

Well that is somewhat out of the blue.  Nobody has complained about the arangements up until now.  REMLR has had it's own bank account for a number of years now.  However the banks initially refused an account in the name of REMLR because we had no legal entity.  Hence why it was in my own name.  I have kept records throughout, and in more fine detail since the incorporateion.  I have presented those records when I have been asked to do so with no hesitation.

This in no way puts REMLR in jepoardy because there was nothing aginst the rules done.  Just as if I had been keeping the cash under my matress, no rules or regulations have been breeched.  Stupid perhaps, but not illegal.

if you want anything explained, just come out and ask.  I understand a few people have grumbles like this, but nobody has bloody bothered asking me, so they haven't got any freaking answers.  I'm sick and tired of the Frecking accusations of whatever.  If you want an answer on any aspect of REMLR, it's history, it's operation, it's finances, then ask instead of worrying or stressing about it.

Think you can do it better, do it your self.  I'll give you the next 500 hours worth of work I have backed up for remlr that needs doing.  And that's just for the next couple lf weeks.  I put a lot of my time into REMLR at the detriment of my family, my projects and my own mental health.  I have always done what is best for REMLR, and for all of those that have spent asignificant ammount of time and effort in researching, gathering and collating the information.

the incorporation of REMLR has been welcome on another front, more people have been more open about coming forward and being able to help on a range of factors so that it is not all in my hands.

Ok, I feel better now, rant over  ;D

also, I put too many numbers on the account details, i'm off to fix that now and update the 2 relevant pages on the REMLR website.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on May 30, 2012, 11:02:45 AM
The bank account details on the REMLR incorporation and shop page have both been rectified now, i had added an extra 2 to the account number, my sincerest apologies.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Cooper on May 30, 2012, 12:09:32 PM
if you want anything explained, just come out and ask.  I understand a few people have grumbles like this, but nobody has bloody bothered asking me, so they haven't got any freaking answers.  I'm sick and tired of the Frecking accusations of whatever.  If you want an answer on any aspect of REMLR, it's history, it's operation, it's finances, then ask instead of worrying or stressing about it.


 It seems to me that these questions have been asked already, in fact if you read the first post in the "what's going on?.... thread, at the end of that the question is asked, again. Don't know any history of all this at all, but i have seen various questions asking about the move and as a newbie i have to say that i am perplexed at the lack of explanation to it all.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Vixen on May 30, 2012, 12:39:59 PM

Well that is somewhat out of the blue.  Nobody has complained about the arangements up until now.  REMLR has had it's own bank account for a number of years now.  However the banks initially refused an account in the name of REMLR because we had no legal entity.  Hence why it was in my own name.  I have kept records throughout, and in more fine detail since the incorporateion.  I have presented those records when I have been asked to do so with no hesitation.

This in no way puts REMLR in jepoardy because there was nothing aginst the rules done.  Just as if I had been keeping the cash under my matress, no rules or regulations have been breeched.  Stupid perhaps, but not illegal.

if you want anything explained, just come out and ask.  I understand a few people have grumbles like this, but nobody has bloody bothered asking me, so they haven't got any freaking answers.  I'm sick and tired of the Frecking accusations of whatever.  If you want an answer on any aspect of REMLR, it's history, it's operation, it's finances, then ask instead of worrying or stressing about it.

Think you can do it better, do it your self.  I'll give you the next 500 hours worth of work I have backed up for remlr that needs doing.  And that's just for the next couple lf weeks.  I put a lot of my time into REMLR at the detriment of my family, my projects and my own mental health.  I have always done what is best for REMLR, and for all of those that have spent asignificant ammount of time and effort in researching, gathering and collating the information.

the incorporation of REMLR has been welcome on another front, more people have been more open about coming forward and being able to help on a range of factors so that it is not all in my hands.

Ok, I feel better now, rant over  ;D

also, I put too many numbers on the account details, i'm off to fix that now and update the 2 relevant pages on the REMLR website.

I would imagine that only you and the committee know what the arrangements actually are...so no one can REALLY complain. I was not complaining, merely asking, as your post regarding the setting up of the bank account was worded in a way to infer that it didn't actually have it's own bank account, or any bank account come to that.

The bank account for REMLR was set up today finally.

Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Vixen on May 30, 2012, 12:44:16 PM
And now I am going to ask, merely because I want to know.....

WHY, EXACTLY, did Inc have a dummy spit and pull REMLR off AULRO?

I have heard a few rumours, and it would be nice to simply know the truth. I'm sure I'm not the only one that wishes to know.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: fc101 on May 30, 2012, 07:20:58 PM
Does it matter - get over it and move on.

Why shouldn't REMLR have its own forum - AULRO's generosity has been great but there is nothing like your own space.

Cheers

Garry
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Vixen on May 30, 2012, 07:30:37 PM
Not in the greater scheme of things Garry but then it doesn't matter if REMLR folds up in the greater scheme of things either but people just like to know these things.

Anyway, I'm a woman, I can't hear rumours and secrets and not want to know. It's the female default setting ;D

And for the record i think a separate forum for REMLR is a great idea. I suggested it to Richard 2 yrs ago myself  ;)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: armyjeep52 on May 30, 2012, 07:48:21 PM
Good day Phoenix
Thanks for all you are doing. I can't see that you would do anything to hurt REMLR after the huge amount of work you put into it. I like the look of the new forum.
After reading lots of stuff about the change and I can't make a lot of sense of it,nor am I going to try to make sense of it,   all I want is for REMLR to go on with the enormous amounts of information helping with restorations as in the past.
I have met a lot of nice people over the years because of REMLR both online and in person and I have been able to source parts such as my teaspoon tipper bodies from WA, which would have been impossible without REMLR.
 
Cheers Ken
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Chazza on May 30, 2012, 09:13:18 PM
Does it matter - get over it and move on.

Why shouldn't REMLR have its own forum - AULRO's generosity has been great but there is nothing like your own space.

Cheers

Garry

There is nothing unreasonable about Vixen's question and I would like to know what exactly happened myself. Richard has invited all of us to ask him any question on this thread, so I suppose his offer is sincere.

I would like to know why; so that together we can help prevent a rather abrupt and unannounced major change to the way REMLR members interact with each other, from happening again. To not explain the change in any meaningful way, has led to the speculation that is starting to surface now.

The trite argument that the "new forum" is not a problem etc. merely ignores the fact that the move has not been explained; and if one more person uses the weasel expression "move on" to try and dismiss legitimate questions, then they are doing REMLR a disservice and treating all members with contempt.

Does it matter? Of course it matters! There has been a change, which might result in years of archival material being lost! Hundreds of hours of work not just by Richard but by Rusty, and Dinty, and Stuee and all of the other contributors, might disappear forever! In any case, the promised return of read-only files will presumably remain at the whim of the host site and is not guaranteed.

Please don't think that I am an avid supporter of AULRO and especially the proprietor; however; I am an avid supporter of REMLR and as such I would like to know what is going on. We have of course been through something similar before, when all of the secret-squirrel stuff was going on when incorporation was being implemented, without a full discussion amongst the membership.

This is not a post about opposing the change at all; it is a request for the truth about what has happened to our association. Neither is it an attempt to have a dig at Richard; the sterling work he has done for REMLR has been superb! However; the membership has the right to know what was said, or done, or not done - if for no other reason than to silence the scuttlebut. Who knows - the truth might be enough to help me abandon AULRO forever!

Cheers Charlie

Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on May 30, 2012, 09:31:58 PM
First some business about which this thread is for.

It is my unfortunate duty to notify everybody to a change o the committee of REMLR Inc.

The committee has had to nullify the election of Kevin Hicks and Josh Murray as committee members because their nominations were never seconded, and by the constitution it is required that the person be nominated and seconded. 

It is not a pleasant thing to have to do, but the committee is determined to run REMLR by the book.

Richard
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on May 30, 2012, 09:36:25 PM
As to the other questions raised, I think I am getting lost in all of the questions now, me and my big mouth  ::)

I had been thinking about the forum move for some time, as Vixen said, it was suggested some time ago.  The forums went down over last weekend for whatever technical issue, and I did not know when it would be back online, so it seemed like a good opportunity to move to our own place. Incisor is happy with the move, and indeed it places less strain on AULRO.

The old forums should be open as a read only, with links to the new forum soon, so all in all, the move should have been completed, and old content available in archive less than 2 weeks from the initial starting point.

I never thought the move would raise this many questions about the wrong things, and I certainly didn't want this much rumor and innuendo surrounding it all.  And to be honest, I've skirted the question a bit to avoid flack going back the other way unduly.

At the end of the day, we were an unpaid guest on AULRO for almost 10 years. And for that I continue to thank incisor. Now we can do it our way, and we are.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tommy on May 30, 2012, 09:57:21 PM
As to the other questions raised, I think I am getting lost in all of the questions now, me and my big mouth  ::)

I had been thinking about the forum move for some time, as Vixen said, it was suggested some time ago.  The forums went down over last weekend for whatever technical issue, and I did not know when it would be back online, so it seemed like a good opportunity to move to our own place. Incisor is happy with the move, and indeed it places less strain on AULRO.

The old forums should be open as a read only, with links to the new forum soon, so all in all, the move should have been completed, and old content available in archive less than 2 weeks from the initial starting point.

I never thought the move would raise this many questions about the wrong things, and I certainly didn't want this much rumor and innuendo surrounding it all.  And to be honest, I've skirted the question a bit to avoid flack going back the other way unduly.

At the end of the day, we were an unpaid guest on AULRO for almost 10 years. And for that I continue to thank incisor. Now we can do it our way, and we are.

Now that wasn't too hard was it Richard  ;D.

Question without notice if I may....Who is hosting the forum? Who owns the server? Do we need to help out with the financial upkeep?

I would be more than happy to throw some money into the kitty if it meant that the forum is isolated from future financial problems.

Regards
Stuart
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Chazza on May 30, 2012, 10:09:21 PM
Thank you for your lucid response Richard  :)

Long live REMLR!

I agree with Tommy and will be taking the 4-year-renewal option when it becomes available,

Cheers Charlie
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Vixen on May 30, 2012, 10:12:23 PM
So don't hold back then Phoenix...answer the questions properly

I for one do not believe that there were any "technical" problems with REMLR on AULRO and Inc has basically said himself that he took the forum away until certain 'conditions" have been met

So now I ask as others have before...what are the conditions?

Like I said, it's like pulling teeth. Are you really going to make me ask all these questions because like a politician you seem to be skirting around in circles and not giving any answers.

Take each question 1 at a time and you won't get lost  :)

I'm not afraid to ask the questions ....... I can't see why it's so hard to answer them
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Vixen on May 31, 2012, 08:23:36 AM
I see REMLR is now available as "read only" in AULRO, so no need to answer my previous questions Richard. "Conditions" have obviously been met and are no longer an issue.

I do have a question though regarding the incorporation (and I apologise if it was covered in REMLR on AULRO but you may recall I did not have full access to that forum). Any of the REMLR Inc committee members should be able to answer this one.

Does REMLR have public liability insurance? I am just wondering if at events such as Corowa, participants can fly the REMLR banner with full cover should anything untoward happen. The REMLR banner was used in the past but before Incorporation it was really just a gathering of like minds. If you have insurance, would being under that "banner" then require ratification by REMLR Inc first? ( this is how clubs work, I'm not sure how Incorporated Associations work)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: THE BOOGER on May 31, 2012, 08:52:08 AM
I asked at the last agm remlr.inc does not have public liability insurance so cant have offical gatherings/trips that is why we are encouraged to join local clubs. Clubs are incorporated under the same rules but do charge much more for membership to cover things like public liability. As far as I can tell we can still use the banner to identify your self or group as remlr members but we cant run a stall or hold a display in the remlr name.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: TROAE on May 31, 2012, 08:56:56 AM
I do have a question though regarding the incorporation (and I apologise if it was covered in REMLR on AULRO but you may recall I did not have full access to that forum).

you did have full access to anything REMLR on AULRO that REMLR would allow you to see ...

you in the end said you had finished your restoration and didn't need REMLR any further and i could delete your account...

cant remember whether i bothered.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Vixen on May 31, 2012, 09:19:09 AM
Dave, there was one point where I did NOT have access to some of REMLR, and a large period where I was not at all interested to even look.
Yes, I did ask for my account to be deleted in the end.
Yes you DID delete my account.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Vixen on May 31, 2012, 09:32:51 AM
I asked at the last agm remlr.inc does not have public liability insurance so cant have offical gatherings/trips that is why we are encouraged to join local clubs. Clubs are incorporated under the same rules but do charge much more for membership to cover things like public liability. As far as I can tell we can still use the banner to identify your self or group as remlr members but we cant run a stall or hold a display in the remlr name.

I thought that would have to be the case due to the low fees. Just wanted to know.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on May 31, 2012, 09:45:32 AM
As stated above, the old forum is ow open as read only
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/remlr/

Also, no we do not ave PLI insurance because we do not run or hold events.  As stated, we encourage registrants and members to join local clubs for that.

Hosting is currently paid for my Richard Green Photography, and donated to REMLR.  THe defence transport heritage of tasmania is also in the same situation. 

The domain name, REMLR.com is currently registered to REMRL Inc, actually, scratch that, I need to transfer the ownership of that.  Damn, another job to do!!  Domain name registration is abotu $25 for 2 years if I recall, nto expensive.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: RobHay on May 31, 2012, 07:40:50 PM
First some business about which this thread is for.

It is my unfortunate duty to notify everybody to a change o the committee of REMLR Inc.

The committee has had to nullify the election of Kevin Hicks and Josh Murray as committee members because their nominations were never seconded, and by the constitution it is required that the person be nominated and seconded. 

It is not a pleasant thing to have to do, but the committee is determined to run REMLR by the book.

Richard

Fellow Members, I suggest you read the following in relation to Committe Members.

15. Election of committee members
(1)Nominations of candidates for election as office-bearers of the association or as ordinary committee members:
(a)   must be made in writing, signed by 2 members of the association and accompanied by the written consent of the candidate (which may be endorsed on the form of the nomination), and
(b)   must be delivered to the secretary of the association at least 7 days before the date fixed for the holding of the annual general meeting at which the election is to take place.
(2)   If insufficient nominations are received to fill all vacancies on the committee, the candidates nominated are taken to be elected and further nominations are to be received at the annual general meeting.
(3)   If insufficient further nominations are received, any vacant positions remaining on the committee are taken to be casual vacancies.
(4)   If the number of nominations received is equal to the number of vacancies to be filled, the persons nominated are taken to be elected.
(5)   If the number of nominations received exceeds the number of vacancies to be filled, a ballot is to be held.
(6)   The ballot for the election of office-bearers and ordinary committee members of the committee is to be conducted at the annual general meeting in such usual and proper manner as the committee may direct.
(7)   A person nominated as a candidate for election as an office-bearer or as an ordinary committee member of the association must be a member of the association.


18.Casual vacancies
(1)   In the event of a casual vacancy occurring in the membership of the committee, the committee may appoint a member of the association to fill the vacancy and the member so appointed is to hold office, subject to this constitution, until the conclusion of the annual general meeting next following the date of the appointment.
(2)   A casual vacancy in the office of a member of the committee occurs if the member:
(a)   dies, or
(b)   ceases to be a member of the association, or
(c)   becomes an insolvent under administration within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001 of the Commonwealth, or
(d)   resigns office by notice in writing given to the secretary, or
(e)   is removed from office under clause 19, or
(f)   becomes a mentally incapacitated person, or
(g)   is absent without the consent of the committee from 3 consecutive meetings of the committee, or
(h)   is convicted of an offence involving fraud or dishonesty for which the maximum penalty on conviction is imprisonment for not less than 3 months, or
(i)   is prohibited from being a director of a company under Part 2D.6 (Disqualification from managing corporations) of the Corporations Act 2001 of the Commonwealth.

Sect 15 (3) Clearly states that any position not filled at the AGM becomes a casual vacancy.

Sect 18 Deals with Casual Vacancys.....particularly the method to be employed in filling them, I should point out here that in the Act  the only person who MUST be resident within NSW is the Public Officer, all other Office Holders and Ordinary Committee Members MUST reside within Australia,

Sect 18 (1) Clearly gives the Management Committee the power to APPOINT members to fill the CASUAL VACANCY, just in case you missed it the first time I will repost that particular section,


(1)   In the event of a casual vacancy occurring in the membership of the committee, the committee may appoint a member of the association to fill the vacancy and the member so appointed is to hold office, subject to this constitution, until the conclusion of the annual general meeting next following the date of the appointment.


Might I suggest that there has been a misreading (at best), and a wrongful application of, of the Rules of Association.

I would therefore call for Kevin Hicks and Josh Murray to be re-instated as Committee Members of The Registry of Ex-Military Landrovers Incorporated, in accordance with the Rules of Association, to fill the two CASUAL VACANCYS.

I would also expect that this happens rather rapidly, as there would appear to be a breach of regulations.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tommy on May 31, 2012, 08:47:11 PM
That was quick Mr Moderator ;D. Well done.

Member number 666....what a twit.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: AGAS 5 on May 31, 2012, 08:55:23 PM

Might I suggest that there has been a misreading (at best), and a wrongful application of, of the Rules of Association.

I would therefore call for Kevin Hicks and Josh Murray to be re-instated as Committee Members of The Registry of Ex-Military Landrovers Incorporated, in accordance with the Rules of Association, to fill the two CASUAL VACANCYS.

I would also expect that this happens rather rapidly, as there would appear to be a breach of regulations.

I believe the Committee should be thanked for being transparent on this matter. I further believe that reasonable time should be allowed for the committee to fully exercise its responsibility by researching their options and then exercising its authority.

I do not believe, if this matter was only brought to their attention a day or so ago, that there has been any wrongful application of or any breach of the regulations. I find suggestions that they are, at best, provocative.

Regards.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: AGAS 5 on May 31, 2012, 08:58:30 PM
That was quick Mr Moderator ;D. Well done.

Member number 666....what a twit.

no problems... just researching how to ban spammers atm  (new fang dangled controls)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tommy on May 31, 2012, 09:05:46 PM
That was quick Mr Moderator ;D. Well done.

Member number 666....what a twit.

no problems... just researching how to ban spammers atm  (new fang dangled controls)

I used the 'Report to Moderator' button at the bottom RHS of post but it rejected my submission  :(. May be a problem there.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Mick_Marsh on May 31, 2012, 09:09:03 PM
That was quick Mr Moderator ;D. Well done.

Member number 666....what a twit.

no problems... just researching how to ban spammers atm  (new fang dangled controls)

I used the 'Report to Moderator' button at the bottom RHS of post but it rejected my submission  :(. May be a problem there.
I got the same. I assume it was because the post had been deleted.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tommy on May 31, 2012, 09:13:48 PM
That was quick Mr Moderator ;D. Well done.

Member number 666....what a twit.

no problems... just researching how to ban spammers atm  (new fang dangled controls)

I used the 'Report to Moderator' button at the bottom RHS of post but it rejected my submission  :(. May be a problem there.
I got the same. I assume it was because the post had been deleted.

OK, here goes nothing....I'm going to report your last post to the moderator Mick  :D. I'll see if it works  ::)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Mick_Marsh on May 31, 2012, 09:14:52 PM
That was quick Mr Moderator ;D. Well done.

Member number 666....what a twit.

no problems... just researching how to ban spammers atm  (new fang dangled controls)

I used the 'Report to Moderator' button at the bottom RHS of post but it rejected my submission  :(. May be a problem there.
I got the same. I assume it was because the post had been deleted.

OK, here goes nothing....I'm going to report your last post to the moderator Mick  :D. I'll see if it works  ::)
Don't get me banned.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tommy on May 31, 2012, 09:16:23 PM
That was quick Mr Moderator ;D. Well done.

Member number 666....what a twit.

no problems... just researching how to ban spammers atm  (new fang dangled controls)

I used the 'Report to Moderator' button at the bottom RHS of post but it rejected my submission  :(. May be a problem there.
I got the same. I assume it was because the post had been deleted.

OK, here goes nothing....I'm going to report your last post to the moderator Mick  :D. I'll see if it works  ::)
Don't get me banned.

Too late Mick  8). It went through no problems ;D. You're now banned  ;D
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: AGAS 5 on May 31, 2012, 09:22:58 PM
ok, ok  :o  l'm trying to log off... quit it !!

lol

Pete
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tommy on May 31, 2012, 09:24:12 PM
Sleep well Pete   8)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Cooper on May 31, 2012, 09:41:40 PM
 Thanks Tommy, that Mick Marsh, if anyone needs banning, it's him. ;)

 Coops.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Mick_Marsh on May 31, 2012, 09:51:18 PM
Yeah. Such a troublemaker.
Ban him now!
I would if I was a moderator.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: RobHay on May 31, 2012, 11:59:34 PM
I also meant to say that no where in the Rules of Association does it state that nominations for positions either as Office Bearers of the Association or as ordinary committee must be 'nominated and seconded'.

What the Rules do state is that a written nomination must be signed by two members of the association and the person so nominated is to provide his written consent.

Should there be equal numbers of nominations to vacancies then all nominations are taken to be elected. sect 15(4). Thats it, all over, no ballott...they are elected!

Should there be insufficient nominations for the number of vacancies then those nominations received are taken to be elected and further nominations are to be received at the Annual General Meeting. sect 15 (2) 

Should there be insufficient nominations to fill all the vacancies then those positions remaining on the committee not filled are taken to be Casual Vacancies. sect 15 (3)

There is a further condition in that all persons nominated for a position as a Officer Bearer or ordinary committee member, MUST be members of the association.

Now my understanding, and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong,  is that at the conclusion of the AGM there where two positions, for whatever reasons, that remained unfilled.

Two persons, who were at all material times members of REMLR inc, were proposed to the Committee to fill these. The Committee, whether they knew it or not that they were acting in accordance with sect 18 (1). accepted these nominations thereby appointing these two persons to the committee of Registry of Ex-Military Land Rover Incorporated. until the conclusion of the next Annual General Meeting.

Section 19 Allows for the removal of members from the Committee, but the rule is very specific: -

19. Removal of committee members
(1)   The association in general meeting may by resolution remove any member of the committee from the office of member before the expiration of the memberís term of office and may by resolution appoint another person to hold office until the expiration of the term of office of the member so removed.
(2)   If a member of the committee to whom a proposed resolution referred to in subclause (1) relates makes representations in writing to the secretary or president (not exceeding a reasonable length) and requests that the representations be notified to the members of the association, the secretary or the president may send a copy of the representations to each member of the association or, if the representations are not so sent, the member is entitled to require that the representations be read out at the meeting at which the resolution is considered.

It should be noted that the ONLY way a committee member can be removed is by way of a resolution passed at a GENERAL MEETING, the person so affected by a proposed resolution to remove them, and prior to any such action being taken, than has the right to make representations in writing to the Secretary of the Association and request that this representation be notified to ALL members.

Of course any committee member moved against has the right of appeal to higher authority or to seek a legal remedy.

All Office Bearers of the Association should be aware that if the committee member is successful in their legal remedy than the brunt of any punitative damages is bourne by those Office Bearers personally. Please take note of the personally part.

The Committee Members recently advised that they were to be removed were not afforded any right of response to the proposal. This was, hopefully, an oversight. They were appointed, following the last AGM to positions remaining vacant (the Casual Vacancies) following that meeting, their appointments were announced to all members. They were at all material times, from that time to this, committee members in accordance with section18 (1) of the Association Rules.

THEY CANNOT BE REMOVED.

Ladies and Gentlemen, REMLR has experienced some difficulties of recent days, which we have over come and will continue to overcome and we will prosper as a knowledge base of like minded persons who enjoy what it is we do. I have no idea what it was that caused the rupture, but I DO believe that it was not a so called 'technical hitch' , I do believe that some person or persons unknown, at this stage, has taken a mighty swipe at us. I have been in the criminal justice system for way too many years both in this country and overseas to not recognise when someone is attempting to do harm to something I hold dear.

In times of trouble we need to put aside our differences and rally to protect REMLR, it is unique.

I call upon the Office Bearers of this great association to study the Associations Incorporations Act 2009 (NSW) and association rules pertaining to New South Wales and reinstated the committee members. And I call upon all members of REMLR to do the same and to stand ready to protect what we have here in REMLR
 
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: hodgo on June 01, 2012, 07:37:44 AM
Thank you Rob for this informative post, I stayed up till midnight last reading the NSW gov. rules on incorparation after our talk the other night must say its very informative and not written in too much legal gargen.
 Hodgo
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: AGAS 5 on June 01, 2012, 09:05:58 AM
This topic is locked pending review.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on June 01, 2012, 01:08:24 PM
I am unlocking this to make a response, and then re locking it, and for a specific reason.

Rob, you stated that the constitution does not state that a nomination needs to be seconded.  That is not actually correct.

It states that a nomination must be signed by 2 members, effectively a nominator, and a seconder.  On the form those 2 signatories are indeed noted as proposer and seconder if it is the wording that concerns you.

As to removal of committee members, we are not stating that we are removing them, we are stating that their nominations were invalid, although one of those is under review already in light of recent information (see below).  There is a significant difference.  Also, it was not set in stone at the AGM, it was carried over for the committee to examine in more detail after the AGM.

One aspect that is making me very upset here is time frames.  I am able to respond often reasonably quickly to these accusations ad demands because I am partly a stay at home dad, and an un necessarily stressed one at that because of all of this, all of me trying to do the right thing.  Right now I should be playing with my daughter, but instead I am responding to the dozens of emails and messages I am receiving.

Any appeal or complaint must be sent to the committee in writing, and this forum is not an official form of communications with the committee.

The committee member nominees whose nominations were determined to be invalid were not refused any right of reply, They were informed of the decision on the phone by the club secretary. This was a decision not taken lightly.

I am also not the only person on the committee, and as such, these matters need to be discussed within the committee.  Not all members are always contactable 24 hours a day, and even fewer wish to be at the beck and call of REMLR every day and night.  The committee will look at these concerns in due course and respond as the committee, regardless of any vacancies, as allowed in the constitution.  However as far as I am aware, and I would have to check with the secretary, no formal complaints about the agm, or recent announcement have been made.  Some new information is also at hand, however some questions have also been raised.

I beg for your patience in giving the committee time to breathe.

Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on June 06, 2012, 04:30:09 PM
Two announcements from the committee now that they have had a chance to correspond.

Kevin Hicks has been reinstated on to the committee as it turns out that his nomination was indeed seconded.  The committee apologies for the drama surrounding this matter.

THe second announcement is that of the Public officer.  The committee has appointed Diana Alan to fill the position and welcome a new face to the committee.

Richard Green
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Outlaw on June 06, 2012, 04:53:30 PM
Congrats to the two new faces on the REMLR Committee... Well done Kev & Diana :-)

How's that LIKE button going Richard? :p
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: The ho hars on June 06, 2012, 05:31:10 PM
Congrats Diana, see you Thursday ;)

Welcome back Kevin  :)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: d@rk51d3 on June 06, 2012, 05:51:40 PM
Great news. 8)

Congrats to those appointed.............. now get to work!!!!  ;D :P
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Uncle Ho on June 06, 2012, 05:55:38 PM
  G'day Folks :)

Thank you I will try to be a good commitee member   ;D  and thank you Carolyn  :D

Uncle Ho
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: hodgo on June 06, 2012, 06:03:20 PM
I know you can handle it Kevin ( REMLR No2) and you deserve it. and I am glad that this issue is all resolved in you favour.

  Hodgo
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Uncle Ho on June 06, 2012, 06:09:52 PM


G'day Hodgo  :)

Sorry, but I am REMLR number 3  :D  Michael Leys is No2  :)

Kevin
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: The ho hars on June 06, 2012, 08:29:02 PM
Oh where is that thanks button :D

And I am sure shonky will  deliver 'Ambrose' over shortly

Mrs hh :)

Hi Everyone

Thanks Committee for dealing with he issue promptly, I will talk to you all ASAP, however I now believe that I have the responsibility of informing the OFT of Andrew's resignation and my appointment as a atter of urgency.  The 28 day limit from Andrew's notification must be close.

To the other members, thank you all for your trust. 

When do I take custodianship of the Public officer's official vehicle "Ambrose"?  (I always wondered what a blood bath Committee meetings must be if a blood box is necessary for the PO.)  ;)

Diana


Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: hodgo on June 06, 2012, 09:48:51 PM
I know you can handle it Kevin ( REMLR No2) and you deserve it. and I am glad that this issue is all resolved in you favour.

  Hodgo

Sorry Kevin just testing your ability to read, I knew you were No 3
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: RobHay on June 06, 2012, 11:01:16 PM
Conratulations Kevin on your appointment to the committee of the Registry of Ex-Military Land Rovers inc. and thank you to the Office Holders of REMLR for a speedy resolution to part of the problem I originally raised.

However there still remains the re-instatement of Josh Murray to the committee to be dealt with.

My understanding of events, and if we had access to REMLR Private on the old system I might be able to more ablely demonstrate my point, is that the Annual General Meeting was offically over and there remained the two unfilled ordinary committee positions. Which the memorandums and articles of association as well as the model rules nominates as CASUAL VACANCIES.

There was no need for persons to be nominated nor seconded for these positions.

The Committee has the power to approach a responsible person and request that they fill the position, and given their consent to serve, then their appointment, as opposed to election, would be valid and binding until the expiration of the next Annual General Meeting.

It makes no difference as to how or who proposed or suggested the names of the persons to fill these positions to the committee. The fact are that two names, of current financial members, were put forward to, and accepted by, the Committee and publicated to the other members, therefore the two appointments were legally binding in accordance with sect.18 (1) which I will at the risk of boring you all to death re-publish here: -

18.Casual vacancies
(1)   In the event of a casual vacancy occurring in the membership of the committee, the committee may appoint a member of the association to fill the vacancy and the member so appointed is to hold office, subject to this constitution, until the conclusion of the annual general meeting next following the date of the appointment.

I submit that the appointment of Josh Murray did occur in accordance with  sect.18 (1) and therefore is binding until the conditions as contained in sect 19 (1)(2) are fulfilled. ( sect. 19 deals with the removal of committee members and has been published on this forum previously)

It has been stated that previous submissions were somehow invalidated because they were not directed in writing to the appropriate Office Holder.

REMLR is a fantastic  and unique organisation with members scattered all over this great nation of ours, and overseas. Our Office Holders likewise are resident in various states widely separated not only by distance but in a few cases by oceans. This forum is recognised as being the forum by which all REMLR members communicate and I submit is very much an appropriate communication tool for us to deal with problems that arise.

I, therefore, would request that The Committee of REMLR give due consideration to this, my submission for the re-instatement of Ordinary Committee Member Josh Murray.

I strongly urge this course of action in the interests of presenting a strong and united front which can only benefit and promote the interests of REMLR and the membership.

Thank You in anticipation. 


Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on June 07, 2012, 09:29:57 AM
And the final piece of committee news for a while is that the Committee has appointed the final Committee member who will also be acting as membership officer.  Welcome Scott Norman to the REMLR Inc Committee.  I will be giving you details on the email address and so on in the next 24 hours or so. This gives REMLR inc the broadest possible spread across states that we could have hoped for.  In recap the committee stands as:

Pesident
[Tas]Richard Green

Vice President
[NSW]Justin Pollard

Secretary
[SA]Wayne Ellard

Treasurer
[Qld]Carolyn DeBuck

Public Officer
[NSW]Diana Alan

Committee Member
[WA]Jack McRoberts
[Qld]Kevin Hicks
[Vic]Scott Norman (Membership Officer)

Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on June 07, 2012, 09:41:42 AM
Rob, in response to your post.

You are quite correct, the position was a casual vacancy and the committee has the power to appoint whoever they see as suitable, given that person's consent.  The Committe has no responsibility, nor legal binding of any sort, to accept any given person over the other.  However the committee has tocome to an agreement on it.  At the AGM the selection of committee members was handed over to the committee as there was some question about the membership financial status of the nominees.  This was found to not be an issue.

The committee is not bound to make the decision at the agm, and as I said, that decision was deferred.

Josh was nominated, but to his own admission, was never seconded, therefore can not be elected to the position.  Therefore there was a casual vacancy that the committee can then deal with.  Nominations and seconding do have to occur in a written format.  If there was a seconding of Josh's nomination, it was not made in writing to anybody on the committee, or on the forum thread for that.

Nominations for election at the AGM do not automatically carry through for a person to be considered for a casual vacancy. They are two seperate matters.  Naturally this person can be approached for the position, but the committee felt that it would like to spread to a victorian member if possoble, rather than a third queensland member.  A number of people from a range of stated volunteered to be the final committee member and membership officer.

That said, the committee can see, as can I and everybody else, your request, and it will be discussed as with any reasonable request, however the matter has been discussed and considered at some length already in this process.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Outlaw on June 07, 2012, 09:53:39 AM
Cheers for the update Richard. As you've said I was not seconded in time and was actually nominated purely due to the fact no one was able to confirm that Kevin was financial after it had been questioned. This nomination did however come after the close of date. I reminded Richard and Wayne of this fact when all the hoohar (not ho har) erupted and as always Kev was my nominated party and personally am very happy with the current committee outline Richard has just posted.

Well done to all... Onwards and upwards :-)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Ellard on June 07, 2012, 02:32:38 PM
Hi there

Well written Phoenix

I personally called both Josh & Kevin explaining the issues and they both agreed with standing down was the best option so it could be done properly - and to get on with what we all do best "Military Land Rover preservation and restorations for our future generations". 

I need to point out this is not a nice job, as I have the upmost respect for them both but they fully understood the reasons behind it.

All the best

Wyane
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Uncle Ho on June 07, 2012, 02:43:17 PM


Thank you Wayne for you kind words

Good that it is all sorted now

Kevin
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: gpigeon on July 08, 2012, 07:52:03 AM
Change from "AULRO".........belated observations!
I have just registered on this forum and was only a casual contributor to the ACCO section of the old aulro one but I have to say that despite reading quickly through the news that I am still confused.
Maybe the REMLR was like a "rowdy teenager wanting more space" but there was really a lot of good technical info on the old forum which is now unavailable?????
Maybe because I am not a "diehard purist" like some of you people, all this seems very political to me. Can someone highlight the advantages of "going it alone and breaking free"? There must be something I am missing!
Anyhow lets see how we go and I really hope we eventually get all the techo stuff available once again.
Rgds.
Bill.
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tankradio on July 31, 2012, 08:03:56 PM
I have to state for the record that I am a little disapointed by all this political 'Argy-Bargy' I have been reading since finding my way onto the new REMLR forum.

Actually to be honest I'm very disapointed.

Having been with REMLR for something like the past ten or twelve years and actively contributing the both of the previous forums, I admit that I was cool to the movement toward incorporation and all it entails.

I really liked the message board when it was simple, factual and without any fuss, ego or politics whatsoever.

I learned to move with the times and adapt. In fact I attended our REMLR AGM at Corowa earlier this year as a full financial member and it would be fair to say that I was not backward in coming forward to make my contribution toward REMLR's transition into an incorporated entity as well as sharing my vision of REMLR's future.

I have to state for the record that few could have been more stunned by the abrupt closure of the previous REMLR forum, especially since I was not extended any form of notice, nor explanation nor even an invitation to join this current Forum.

I have also noted what I would describe as a slightly 'undesirable' element beginning to gain a foothold in the evolving REMLR culture. By this I mean the politics, the provicative posts, the constant hijacking of threads for personal conversations and an emerging sense that some REMLR members are throwing their weight around on the forum and in public as representatives of REMLR.

In my opinion we here at REMLR are merely a collective of individual private citizens brought together by our mutual interest in ex Military vehicles.

We most certainly are NOT an authority on the subject, although I accept that the REMLR website which we have all shared in accumulating. Is considered to be the information database with regard to Ex Military Land Rovers.

We at REMLR do NOT have a right to dictate to owners of Landrovers in any way regarding how they should operate, restore, enjoy, buy or sell their private property.

We at REMLR do NOT have a right to exclusive opinion on anything whatsoever to do with Ex Military vehicles and equipment either.

We at REMLR  DO have a responsibility to act in a measured and mature manner at all times when online or in the real world.

I think most of us are on the ball in this regard but every now and again, and increasingly too often for my comfort, my attention is being drawn to negative behavior by persons representing REMLR and bringing the rest of us, the silent and reasonable majority, into disrepute.

I believe that REMLR should be a group which is mature, reasonable, and measured when viewed by the public.

Anything other than the above and we become just another rabble of a group, and there are too many rabble groups alread

I congratulate the committee and the rest of the responsible hard wirking volunteers who are bringing REMLR into the 21st century. I only hope that it isn't going to be at the cost of our image and values.

We also have a world class database and website, notwithstanding a few small typos and accuracy issues I think we should all be very proud of it indeed

Sincerely

Phill
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tommy on July 31, 2012, 10:06:15 PM
I have to state for the record that I am a little disapointed by all this political 'Argy-Bargy' I have been reading since finding my way onto the new REMLR forum.

Actually to be honest I'm very disapointed.

Having been with REMLR for something like the past ten or twelve years and actively contributing the both of the previous forums, I admit that I was cool to the movement toward incorporation and all it entails.

I really liked the message board when it was simple, factual and without any fuss, ego or politics whatsoever.

I learned to move with the times and adapt. In fact I attended our REMLR AGM at Corowa earlier this year as a full financial member and it would be fair to say that I was not backward in coming forward to make my contribution toward REMLR's transition into an incorporated entity as well as sharing my vision of REMLR's future.

I have to state for the record that few could have been more stunned by the abrupt closure of the previous REMLR forum, especially since I was not extended any form of notice, nor explanation nor even an invitation to join this current Forum.

I have also noted what I would describe as a slightly 'undesirable' element beginning to gain a foothold in the evolving REMLR culture. By this I mean the politics, the provicative posts, the constant hijacking of threads for personal conversations and an emerging sense that some REMLR members are throwing their weight around on the forum and in public as representatives of REMLR.

In my opinion we here at REMLR are merely a collective of individual private citizens brought together by our mutual interest in ex Military vehicles.

We most certainly are NOT an authority on the subject, although I accept that the REMLR website which we have all shared in accumulating. Is considered to be the information database with regard to Ex Military Land Rovers.

We at REMLR do NOT have a right to dictate to owners of Landrovers in any way regarding how they should operate, restore, enjoy, buy or sell their private property.

We at REMLR do NOT have a right to exclusive opinion on anything whatsoever to do with Ex Military vehicles and equipment either.

We at REMLR  DO have a responsibility to act in a measured and mature manner at all times when online or in the real world.

I think most of us are on the ball in this regard but every now and again, and increasingly too often for my comfort, my attention is being drawn to negative behavior by persons representing REMLR and bringing the rest of us, the silent and reasonable majority, into disrepute.

I believe that REMLR should be a group which is mature, reasonable, and measured when viewed by the public.

Anything other than the above and we become just another rabble of a group, and there are too many rabble groups alread

I congratulate the committee and the rest of the responsible hard wirking volunteers who are bringing REMLR into the 21st century. I only hope that it isn't going to be at the cost of our image and values.

We also have a world class database and website, notwithstanding a few small typos and accuracy issues I think we should all be very proud of it indeed

Sincerely

Phill

Howdy Phill

Someone got outa the wrong side of bed this morning ;D

BTW....what the hell are you doing in NSW :-\

Stuart



Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Tankradio on August 01, 2012, 01:37:27 AM
Anything I want - it's my birthright :)
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Phoenix on August 04, 2012, 10:52:07 AM
I have to state for the record that I am a little disapointed by all this political 'Argy-Bargy' I have been reading since finding my way onto the new REMLR forum.

Actually to be honest I'm very disapointed.

Having been with REMLR for something like the past ten or twelve years and actively contributing the both of the previous forums, I admit that I was cool to the movement toward incorporation and all it entails.

I really liked the message board when it was simple, factual and without any fuss, ego or politics whatsoever.

I learned to move with the times and adapt. In fact I attended our REMLR AGM at Corowa earlier this year as a full financial member and it would be fair to say that I was not backward in coming forward to make my contribution toward REMLR's transition into an incorporated entity as well as sharing my vision of REMLR's future.

I have to state for the record that few could have been more stunned by the abrupt closure of the previous REMLR forum, especially since I was not extended any form of notice, nor explanation nor even an invitation to join this current Forum.

I have also noted what I would describe as a slightly 'undesirable' element beginning to gain a foothold in the evolving REMLR culture. By this I mean the politics, the provicative posts, the constant hijacking of threads for personal conversations and an emerging sense that some REMLR members are throwing their weight around on the forum and in public as representatives of REMLR.

In my opinion we here at REMLR are merely a collective of individual private citizens brought together by our mutual interest in ex Military vehicles.

We most certainly are NOT an authority on the subject, although I accept that the REMLR website which we have all shared in accumulating. Is considered to be the information database with regard to Ex Military Land Rovers.

We at REMLR do NOT have a right to dictate to owners of Landrovers in any way regarding how they should operate, restore, enjoy, buy or sell their private property.

We at REMLR do NOT have a right to exclusive opinion on anything whatsoever to do with Ex Military vehicles and equipment either.

We at REMLR  DO have a responsibility to act in a measured and mature manner at all times when online or in the real world.

I think most of us are on the ball in this regard but every now and again, and increasingly too often for my comfort, my attention is being drawn to negative behavior by persons representing REMLR and bringing the rest of us, the silent and reasonable majority, into disrepute.

I believe that REMLR should be a group which is mature, reasonable, and measured when viewed by the public.

Anything other than the above and we become just another rabble of a group, and there are too many rabble groups alread

I congratulate the committee and the rest of the responsible hard wirking volunteers who are bringing REMLR into the 21st century. I only hope that it isn't going to be at the cost of our image and values.

We also have a world class database and website, notwithstanding a few small typos and accuracy issues I think we should all be very proud of it indeed

Sincerely

Phill

Nice to hear from you again Phill, I have to say I agree with you completely on, well, all of that :)  And it's nice to know that we have your suport.

Oh, and tell me where teh typos are so I can fix them please  ;D
Title: Re: Registry of Ex Military Landrovers Inc news
Post by: Cliffy on August 05, 2012, 09:17:13 PM
I have to state for the record that I am a little disapointed by all this political 'Argy-Bargy' I have been reading since finding my way onto the new REMLR forum.

Actually to be honest I'm very disapointed.

Having been with REMLR for something like the past ten or twelve years and actively contributing the both of the previous forums, I admit that I was cool to the movement toward incorporation and all it entails.

I really liked the message board when it was simple, factual and without any fuss, ego or politics whatsoever.

I learned to move with the times and adapt. In fact I attended our REMLR AGM at Corowa earlier this year as a full financial member and it would be fair to say that I was not backward in coming forward to make my contribution toward REMLR's transition into an incorporated entity as well as sharing my vision of REMLR's future.

I have to state for the record that few could have been more stunned by the abrupt closure of the previous REMLR forum, especially since I was not extended any form of notice, nor explanation nor even an invitation to join this current Forum.

I have also noted what I would describe as a slightly 'undesirable' element beginning to gain a foothold in the evolving REMLR culture. By this I mean the politics, the provicative posts, the constant hijacking of threads for personal conversations and an emerging sense that some REMLR members are throwing their weight around on the forum and in public as representatives of REMLR.

In my opinion we here at REMLR are merely a collective of individual private citizens brought together by our mutual interest in ex Military vehicles.

We most certainly are NOT an authority on the subject, although I accept that the REMLR website which we have all shared in accumulating. Is considered to be the information database with regard to Ex Military Land Rovers.

We at REMLR do NOT have a right to dictate to owners of Landrovers in any way regarding how they should operate, restore, enjoy, buy or sell their private property.

We at REMLR do NOT have a right to exclusive opinion on anything whatsoever to do with Ex Military vehicles and equipment either.

We at REMLR  DO have a responsibility to act in a measured and mature manner at all times when online or in the real world.

I think most of us are on the ball in this regard but every now and again, and increasingly too often for my comfort, my attention is being drawn to negative behavior by persons representing REMLR and bringing the rest of us, the silent and reasonable majority, into disrepute.

I believe that REMLR should be a group which is mature, reasonable, and measured when viewed by the public.

Anything other than the above and we become just another rabble of a group, and there are too many rabble groups alread

I congratulate the committee and the rest of the responsible hard wirking volunteers who are bringing REMLR into the 21st century. I only hope that it isn't going to be at the cost of our image and values.

We also have a world class database and website, notwithstanding a few small typos and accuracy issues I think we should all be very proud of it indeed

Sincerely

Phill

Hmmm....can you be more specific?? I can't see any BS in the recent posts :o
I know there was alot rubbish at the start but I think that's all ancient history.