by Royal Lady » 13 Aug 2012 11:59
13 Aug 2012 11:59by Big Foot » 13 Aug 2012 13:16
13 Aug 2012 13:16by Big Foot » 13 Aug 2012 13:17
13 Aug 2012 13:17by Dirk Gently » 13 Aug 2012 13:20
13 Aug 2012 13:20You owe me £5.Big Foot wrote:£5 on Dirkers being involved somewhere along the route
by Green » 13 Aug 2012 13:22
13 Aug 2012 13:22by Big Foot » 13 Aug 2012 13:49
13 Aug 2012 13:49Wasn't necessarily the STAR link m8 but the maths equation in my head went something like...Dirk Gently wrote:You owe me £5.Big Foot wrote:£5 on Dirkers being involved somewhere along the route
Absolutely nothing to do with this. Didn't know anything about it and wouldn't have wanted to have anything to do with it if I had.
And resigned as a STAR Board member the best part of two years ago ... do keep up!
by Dirk Gently » 13 Aug 2012 13:54
13 Aug 2012 13:54Three main reasons, which I outlined in a long (and probably highly tedious) resignation letter. I'll précis below :Green wrote:Why did you resign, Dirk
by Dirk Gently » 13 Aug 2012 13:59
13 Aug 2012 13:59A few years ago, maybe. Been there, done that, recognised the pitfalls .....Big Foot wrote:Wasn't necessarily the STAR link m8 but the maths equation in my head went something like...Dirk Gently wrote:You owe me £5.Big Foot wrote:£5 on Dirkers being involved somewhere along the route
Absolutely nothing to do with this. Didn't know anything about it and wouldn't have wanted to have anything to do with it if I had.
And resigned as a STAR Board member the best part of two years ago ... do keep up!
"RFC" + "Media" = Dirkers
£5 to a charity of your choice?
by Green » 13 Aug 2012 14:10
13 Aug 2012 14:10Thanks for taking the time to type out, that's interesting.Dirk Gently wrote:Three main reasons, which I outlined in a long (and probably highly tedious) resignation letter. I'll précis below :Green wrote:Why did you resign, Dirk
1. STAR was, in my opinion, far too risk-averse and far too resistant to change. Some decisions had recently been made at the time that I was deeply unhappy about.
2. STAR's way of internal decision-making was far too collective - with everyone involved in decision making and minimal delegation of authority to portfolio holders. I felt this was counter-productive.
3. I believed that STAR was slowly dying as an organisation through lack of new-blood coming through. STAR had never had an election and didn't have a membership which was properly representative of all Reading supporters. That's not down to STAR, as it represented its members, but that was a by-product of the fact that STAR's members primarily join to travel by coach (*). I felt STAR had never found a way to answer the question “I don’t travel by coach, why should I pay a tenner to join STAR?” - and that was damaging them as an organisation and shaping their policies in the wrong direction. I believe STAR needs to open its membership wider and cheaper (possibly via a zero-cost, e-membership, or maybe a very low-cost membership with "top-up" for "Travel membership") so that it will be more attractive to *all* Reading supporters. With a larger membership, it'll be more effective, more representative and it'll have a much larger talent-pool of people who will, hopefully, participate more.
Don't get me wrong, I put a lot of effort into helping found STAR and helping run it for 8 years, and I don't want to damage it or get into a slanging match with anyone. But I want STAR to be a dynamic, representative and inclusive mass-membership campaigning organisation, as I believe that Reading supporters need and deserve an organisation like that. I could see STAR getting less and less effective and moving further and further away from being the type of organisation I believe it needs to be, and got to the point where what I felt I could achieve through STAR wasn't worth the time I was putting into it.
(*) Just in case I get accused of lying, the source for this is the STAR membership survey performed the previous year, in which 57.6% of STAR members gave their "most important" reason for joining STAR was to travel on STAR coaches.
by Dirk Gently » 13 Aug 2012 14:27
13 Aug 2012 14:27True, but it's the only thing that potentially might - because you can be sure that not increasing numbers almost certainly won't increase engagement and participation.Green wrote:.....
I guess noone (least of all me) would argue against the desire to increase the reach and membership of STAR, but I guess the challenge would be that the increase in numbers would not necessarily lead to an increase in engagement with the organisation.
by Green » 13 Aug 2012 14:29
13 Aug 2012 14:29by Dirk Gently » 13 Aug 2012 14:41
13 Aug 2012 14:41by Royal Lady » 13 Aug 2012 16:29
13 Aug 2012 16:29by STAR Liaison » 13 Aug 2012 16:53
13 Aug 2012 16:53We were asked by the BBC to get an audience of 100 members so the E-STAR to members filled the list easily and quickly.Royal Lady wrote:I note, with a touch of sadness, that STAR didn't bother to mention this event on here - as there may have been one or two nobbers who were not members of STAR who would have liked to attend (not talking about me here btw). I was told STAR were having a meeting on 9 Aug - but starliaison didn't get back to me since, so can only assume they vetoed the idea of me acting as a go-between for HNA and STAR. I do note, however, that the AGM is at the end of the month, so maybe that's when it is going to be mentioned?
by Royal Lady » 13 Aug 2012 16:56
13 Aug 2012 16:56by Royal Lady » 13 Aug 2012 17:00
13 Aug 2012 17:00by STAR Liaison » 13 Aug 2012 17:03
13 Aug 2012 17:03I know all too well how much you put into STAR Dirk, and I don't want a slanging match either as we have both put in many more hours for our fellow supporters than most if not all of STAR's critics. We may disagree on parts of STAR's purpose but we have tried to involve others and it has slowly happened.Dirk Gently wrote: 3. I believed that STAR was slowly dying as an organisation through lack of new-blood coming through. STAR had never had an election and didn't have a membership which was properly representative of all Reading supporters. That's not down to STAR, as it represented its members, but that was a by-product of the fact that STAR's members primarily join to travel by coach (*). I felt STAR had never found a way to answer the question “I don’t travel by coach, why should I pay a tenner to join STAR?” - and that was damaging them as an organisation and shaping their policies in the wrong direction. I believe STAR needs to open its membership wider and cheaper (possibly via a zero-cost, e-membership, or maybe a very low-cost membership with "top-up" for "Travel membership") so that it will be more attractive to *all* Reading supporters. With a larger membership, it'll be more effective, more representative and it'll have a much larger talent-pool of people who will, hopefully, participate more.
Don't get me wrong, I put a lot of effort into helping found STAR and helping run it for 8 years, and I don't want to damage it or get into a slanging match with anyone. But I want STAR to be a dynamic, representative and inclusive mass-membership campaigning organisation, as I believe that Reading supporters need and deserve an organisation like that. I could see STAR getting less and less effective and moving further and further away from being the type of organisation I believe it needs to be, and got to the point where what I felt I could achieve through STAR wasn't worth the time I was putting into it.
by STAR Liaison » 13 Aug 2012 17:51
13 Aug 2012 17:51Just looked at the 2011 survey and we have had progress as the percentage has dropped to under 40% and third in the medal table.Dirk Gently wrote:
(*) Just in case I get accused of lying, the source for this is the STAR membership survey performed the previous year, in which 57.6% of STAR members gave their "most important" reason for joining STAR was to travel on STAR coaches.
by Compo's Hat » 13 Aug 2012 20:17
13 Aug 2012 20:17by Dare to Dr£am » 13 Aug 2012 20:23
13 Aug 2012 20:23Really, or is that because your name isn't in the clubs good books at the moment? Some of your comments regarding TSI weren't appreciated earlier in the year.Dirk Gently wrote:You owe me £5.Big Foot wrote:£5 on Dirkers being involved somewhere along the route
Absolutely nothing to do with this. Didn't know anything about it and wouldn't have wanted to have anything to do with it if I had.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], RG30 and 48 guests