|
Post by lugnutz on Jan 18, 2007 23:17:23 GMT -5
You nailed it HH! "No special interest agenda" is the key. We talk about whatever here, and the "administration" doesn't flex their muscles and stiffle conversation when they don't agree with the subject matter.......for example, what site but this one would allow shirtless waterfowl hunters posting pictures? DU? I think not!!!! LOL. I'm feelin' a group hug coming on! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 18, 2007 23:20:22 GMT -5
This has been a very interesting discussion and I have read each post very intently.
Excellent points were made on both sides about a new Indiana hunting organization.
I must say that when the old IndianaSportsmen.com was up and running we did have a lot of talk behind the scenes about an new organized hunting group. It didn't get a whole lot further than just talking. I do believe that a charter was drawn up and I still might have a copy somewhere on my PC (among my MANY files).
Now with that said I would like to hear the real particulars of a new organized hunting group before I joined and supported that group. I would not head it up, but I would be an active participant.
However, what I don't want to do is have any group based at this site. This site was put here for several good reasons and politics was not one of them.
This site was put here:
1) To have a place to come, relax and enjoy the company of other hunters and fishermen/women
2) To pass along IDNR information keeping Indiana hunters up to date.
3)To get hunters and fishermen involved in the administrative rules process - no matter what side they are on with any issue.
4) To share hunting and fishing techniques/stories with each other
5) To promote hunting, fishing and trapping.
6) Do charitable deeds as we saw fit. (We've done 3 so far)
I am quite proud of this site and the many members we have. There is good reason why we have grown like we have and that is this is what the people want.
Like Horn Harvester said," We have no special interest agenda here other than to promote hunting and fishing in Indiana..."
That is what the people want and I'd like to keep it that way.
Horn Harvester also said, "I don't think you guys realize how much clout you have with the DNR. They read this board more than you think. Where else can they get a more honest opinion about outdoor legislation than here."
That is a guaranteed fact.
At the bottom of this page is an active link that says "This Board Hosted For FREE By ProBoards". If someone wants to start a new cyber Indiana hunting group and wants to do it in a closed or open forum all they have to do is go to Pro-boards and get one.
Thanks for your input on this thread and I hope that you all understand my position.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Jan 19, 2007 1:30:02 GMT -5
Well said, Woody. I completely understand and now agree with your decision. After reading the rest of the posts, I realize there probably couldn't be the conversion of your site into an organization like some of us would have desired without at least the great risk if not the certainty of harm to what we have here now. This site is definitely too good a thing to risk messing up. You've managed to maintain a great balance here between necessary control and freedom to express our opinions, and you've done it while keeping the place friendly as a hunting camp. By the way, THANKS!
I'd also be glad to join any such organization that anyone starts, but I now see that it would be best done separately from this site.
I still maintain that there needs to be no competition between any such organization and any other organization already existing. The only thing we'd be competing for would be the dues from those potential members who could only afford to join one or the other. I would think a cyber-organization would need very little in dues money, unless they insisted on making some motels and caterers happy with their annual banquets or some printing house and the post office wealthy with their newsletters. Something done completely online with (maybe, if desired) an annual meeting at a shelterhouse catered by a couple buckets of chicken seems about right to me. No need to pretend to be SCI or the NWTF. Not knocking either of those org's, just saying their annual banquets are out of this old guy's price range and I doubt that I'll ever wear a tie again while I'm breathing unless I find a camo one that's reasonable.
It would give us a chance to make our opinions on the issues known (again?) to the DNR and/or the legislature, with full representation for the minority opinions, and it might be fun to meet up once a year and put a face to the posts.
The plus to such an organization is another force representing hunters of all persuasions, including those who are now outside other org's for whatever reasons. IMO, it would be best if it remained almost entirely an organization for political representation for hunters, and left the educational and charitable functions to other existing org's already providing those services.
The minuses would be the imagined competition with other org's in some folks' minds and damage to this site if it were tied into the site too closely. Looks to me like both minuses can be avoided easily by a new organization that might be born here, but which would be a completely separate stand-alone entity.
|
|
|
Post by wapahiti on Jan 19, 2007 11:56:01 GMT -5
. How it could work. Check all ego's at the door. Try to see all sides. When you see something that you disagree with let it be known and move on. Try and leave personalities out of every discussion so we don't get caught up in petty arguments. Have a positive attitude at all times about what we are doing. Support the org when the membership makes a decision. My experience with orgs. They start with good people with good intentions. After a while only a few driven people are doing 90% of the work. Then they get very defensive since they do all the work and are not receptive to new ideas or change. The People that are doing the work get criticized for just about every word they say. They will get accused of everything , even taking money from the org. 90% of all accusation are unfounded rumors. Other people will run around trying to discredit the org with a passion. People will become turned off. Good people will not join or if they do join they just send dues money. When they attend meetings they get tired really quick of the arguing, back stabbing or whatever someone might do to advance their agenda. Pretty soon burnout occurs in the people doing the work and taking the beating. They quit and some new blood may step in and try, just to have the thing repeat the cycle. With a cyber club it is hard to write something down and have everyone hear it the same way. Expression on a key board is very difficult. This has started a lot of problems. I have been in many orgs the past 25 years. it is a shame to see the politics turn so many good people away. Can it work yes, in my opinion it is already working and in place here. We come here for fun, friends, and information from other outdoorsmen. We do this without official meetings, no pres or board. Just everyone being equal to speak their mind.
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Jan 20, 2007 8:57:31 GMT -5
Woody,
Good decision.
This is way too nice of a place to take a chance on messing it up.
If someone else starts such an orgnanization you can always link to that site to direct members there. If they so desire.
Seperate, but supportive.
|
|