Hostile Takeover

[George Greer]

I quit!!!

George Greer, Markt Einersheim Germany

[Chris Haynes]

Thank you Hackwing.

[INLINE4NUT]

Hackwing you have said volumes and I for one agree and am happy you did so !!! While I have met many from across the pond that I like I agree 100% THE CLUB NAME IS ANTIQUE MOTORCYCLE CLUB of AMERICA !! NOT the WORLD ! THANK YOU!

Kevin and Robin deserve way more respect than what they are getting. Robin has invested too many years in our judging system to be pushed aside by a couple Johnny come latelies.(halter,dawdy,slocombe). My family has held an Amca membership since its inseption in 1954, and I am the fourth generation. If I see Steve Slocombe at Oley next month, I will be glad to spit in his face. There has to be voting. If we could vote in our officers, we wouldnt need to deal with these jokers. I hate to talk like this but these guys had to mess with a system that was working very smoothly.

[hackwing]

Hi Steve,

I can see we have a communication problem! As the great Irish playwright (and Nobel Prize winner) once said "England and America are two countries separated by a common language".

Steve I am told that you are a gentleman raised in the English manner and that you currently reside there so let me state the issue more simply. See here, in the States, we have never had a monarchy, and therefore, we have no aristocracy other than an aristocracy of success built by hard work, even sometimes illegal work but hard just the same. You clearly have successfully alienated every member who has worked with his own bleeding hands to rebuild a piece of history!

1. You misstate the facts either out of intent or ignorance! I can forgive ignorance because it can be cured by education, but self-serving intent is another matter. The four founding members of the club were business men but only one was in the MOTORCYCLE BUSINESS, and he was an employee not an entrepreneur.

2. As the owner of one of the few bikes in the AMCA to receive a personal invitation to a Concoeurs event (Fairfield 2009 sponsored by Porsche) I turned down the invitation when it became clear that they wanted no involvement with the AMCA and our members, they only wanted the bike and my money.

3. I too believe the judging needs to be upgraded. We need a series of awards past Winner's Circle to encourage members who do have excellent bikes to take the next step. That next step might be "National Awards" for attending 5 or more meets in a single season. It could involve fully documenting the bike with pictures and history. It could involve actively assisting another member to obtain a higher level achievement as an official "sponsor" for a new member. Many new members don't know where to obtain information and parts.

4. UNDERSTAND THIS; THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE NORTH AMERICAN MEMBERS ARE HANDS ON, WORKING CLASS GUYS! What you, and I do mean you, are attempting will essentially force them out of the club. We know you can afford a concoeurs restoration, but the rest of us "do the best we can".

5. In the United States we have never had a "Court of The Star Chamber" which conducted secret trials with secret verdicts. Historically this was an English aristocratic tradition until constitutional monarchy took over. Even in times of extreme duress, for instance 9/11, when we have done these things, in the fullness of history we regret it. Board decisions which have widespread implications to the membership should be published in "the light of day".

6. It is not the American way to say to members if you want a copy of a document write the Secretary. It is the American way to make information free and easily available to all members. If you doubt this, I refer you to "The Freedom of Information Act" which requires, with the exception of a threat to national security, for government agencies to make information freely available to all citzens.

7. It is my understanding that the restoration of motorcycles in the U.K. and Europe in general, is an "upper class" activity because of the costs involved. One of the things we have always prided ourselves in the U.S. is that we are all brothers (and sisters) when it comes to common interest. That's why a poor haberdasher from Missouri could become president.

8. Given the difference in attitude and language, why the hell do we have a Euporean chapter? What we should have is an affliated club called "The Antique Motorcycle Club of The European Union" with someone like yourself in charge.

9. There is a reason we kicked the English out of here in 1789; you guys built an empire by force and by divine right of kings. We built a nation by work, sweat, suffering of all concerned regardless of income. We don't want or need aristocrats! We need people who remember they are on the board by the right of consent of the governed.

10. We believe in the right of free speech, you clearly do not! Your postings on this site clearly are an attempt to surpress dissent, a thing that does not sit well with Americans.

11. The "agenda" is not the club's agenda; its you agenda. You brought it to the president, you formed a committee before you had a charter to do so, you forced the removal of the existing key personnel. We may be simple hard-working people but we are not stupid!

12. We will continue to protest, object, and in general, voice our opinions whether you like it or not! Of course, like some of your aristocratic predecessors, you could always shutdown the newspapers (or this forum) but I guarentee you will never suppress Americans by intimidation. They tried that with Patrick Henry, and it didn't work either.

13. I can guarantee you that you will be challenged at every meet you come to in the U.S. It is our right to do so, that's how it is for us.

I could go on at length but by now it should be clear to you that "YOU HAVE PERSONALLY OFFENDED MANY MEMBERS". You could have achieved rule changes by simply sending a copy to the members and asking for their opinion. Then you would have had "the consent of the governed" and the voice "of the majority" with which to go forward, and no one would have been offended.

Oh, by the way, nothing personal in all of this, I just want to go forward with "the club's" agenda!

Hackwing

[Robin-M]

Rocky and all, (in response to Steve Slocombe's post that he posted for Rocky)

I like your letter. You can't even get my title correct, you're not the only one, Dawdy and Slocombe get it incorrect also. My title was Assistant Chief Judge. You have never been interested in the judging and you did not form this judging committee. As I stated many times before, back in October when this illigitimate committee was started by Steve Slocombe and others, without the Chief Judge's knowledge, luckily I was included in their emails. When I saw all the new topics, rule changes and the subcommittees that were being formed, with chair persons being appointed, I asked if Kevin gave them the ok to do this. I was told that this was not needed. So I asked them to stop. They ignored me and kept on going with their agenda. I asked a few more times for them to stop and they kept on going. That's when I called you and told you what was going on and asked you, as the president, to stop this illigitimate judging committee, they kept going. During this whole time Kevin was away and did not have access to the internet. So, I called you again and asked you to stop this committee at least till Kevin is back in town. But instead of you stopping the committee, you authorized it and said you'd be the chair person to oversee it and you allowed their agenda to keep going. By you doing this, you overruled the Chief and Assistant Chief Judges positions. Although we were allowed to be on the committee, we had no power as our titles implied. INSTEAD OF STEVE FORMING HIS OWN NEW JUDGING COMMITTEE, WHY DIDN'T HE COME TO KEVIN AND ME WITH ALL THESE NEW PROPOSALS AND WORK THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS?

I DID NOT RESIGN OR QUIT. After your childish blowup after the board meeting, in the lobby of the hotel, between 1 and 1:30 a.m. and you told Kevin "he's out of here" and you fired him on the spot. I know this for a fact, because I was there addressing Richard Spagnoli about this new waiver form that Kevin handed me, that was proposed to be used for each member to sign before they can have their bike judged. So all day Saturday, in the cold, windy, rainy day, I was in my vending spot all day, talking and helping our members, like I always do. You or none of the board members had the courtesy to come by and tell me if I still had a job OR if I was moving up to Chief Judge like I was told by you in a previous email OR just by proper procession. I heard nothing. So I figured I was fired also. In case you forgot what you said to me in a November 12 email when you sent me some committee information, here is your email.

Hi Robin, Sorry you have not been kept in loop. This President's Judging Committee is something I came up with to end conflict between Kevin and Steve, and get things going forward. Basically it the same as what we had, only with a few different faces and some set meetings. I sent this out 2 weeks ago. I thought Kevin would have told you. Board has been waiting for Kevin's reply join in or step aside. Steve gave his support within a hour. You must believe me no one wants your or Kevin's job, they just want things done right and openly. The chief Judge is appointed by President not voted by board. I do not want to replace Kevin, but I will. If he steps down you will be first person I ask. Robin read outline of my committee and hopefully give me your support. In setting this up thought I leaned toward Kevin. Letting Steve on committee was only item I thought Kevin would object to. Robin if you agree, try to talk to Kevin.Rocky

You never asked me to be the Chief Judge as you stated in your email. Although Sunday afternoon in my trailer when you finally came to talk to me, you couldn't look me in the face and you said if I would abide by all the new rule changes and follow instructions from the new Chief Judge, that I could remain the Assistant Chief Judge. This is when I asked who the new Chief Judge was. I was surprised to hear it was someone that just received their judges card in September of 2009. This person has been doing a great job helping Kevin and I initiate an updated apprentice judge program but he's only been involved in our judging system since 2005. So why would ask him to be the Chief Judge instead of asking me, a person who you told you would ask to be Chief Judge, a person that has given 35 years to benefit the AMCA judging system and our members, a person with more experience, knowledge and common sense in our judging system than any one else. It just doesn't make sense.

I am very glad that you finally showed up at a judging breakfast. I've asked you to do this many times before. Maybe if you would have been involved with the judging system, you would not have been so quick to jump on the bandwagon of the people trying to overthrow a good, smooth running, working system. You could have instructed these people to work with Kevin and I and present their proposals and possible changes to us, not to overthrow us. I'll bet you were surprised Sunday morning to see all the judges and motorcycles and the technical core of our club. A first time experience in anything is usually a lasting impression.

Choosing a Chief Judge is a presidential task. All of our previous presidents were involved in the judging system, having bikes judged, being a judge and presenting awards at the awards ceremonies. In my opinion, I don't feel that spending 5 months on an email judging committee, phone calls, one partial committee meeting in Eustis and one day on the judging field in Eustis, gives you enough experience to make a competent decision.

Robin Markey

[bikerdds]

Ya know that by the time the general membership finds out about changes to the judging system it will be the Summer issue. That would be about the week of Rhinebeck around here. Way too late for any one to have notice for all but the last three meets of the year. That's just rude! But that's the way it is I guess. What can we do now? How does one get a copy of this organizations Corporate Operating Procedures anyway? I think I may like to know a bit more about the workings of this little club I'm in.

Contact Trudi Richards and she will e-mail you the most up to date copy of the club bylaws. She is listed in the list of board members and email addresses.

[joestuff]

Steve, I'm new to the AMCA as compared to most members. But I'll step in a bit.
Why don't you, or the new chief judge, as you requested, start two new threads in the Judging section here.

One thread about what exactly the rule changes are, and for technical discussion of how these changes can positively or negatively affect the mission of the club. No club politics on this thread. Technical and club ramifications of the rule changes only.

Another thread to discuss the club politics. As how the club is run is a separate issue from the rules, and members have a vested and important interest in how/why changes are made. How members will be informed of changes in the future, etc.

Note when these threads are started that the other tread exists, and respectfully direct users to to correct thread if they post off topic.

Thanks
Joe

[Paps]

Based on those who may be considering having their bike judged at one of the future meets, I don't see why it would not be possible to mail every member a copy of the rule changes, or at least a postcard directing them to a location where they can copy and print those new changes. Postage would be the main cost involved but the expence should be taken. IMO Paps

[bmh]

Ya know that by the time the general membership finds out about changes to the judging system it will be the Summer issue. That would be about the week of Rhinebeck around here. Way too late for any one to have notice for all but the last three meets of the year. That's just rude! But that's the way it is I guess. What can we do now? How does one get a copy of this organizations Corporate Operating Procedures anyway? I think I may like to know a bit more about the workings of this little club I'm in.

[Steve Slocombe]

No, I'm saying we should get on with OUR agenda of having fun with old bikes. The Board tries hard to concentrate on the antique bikes and the membership rather than personalities, and I don't know Kevin and Robin well enough for these recent events to be personal. We've paid tribute to their previous support of our judging function; neither of them appears to want to be associated with a new and more rigorous system; and three weeks of one-sided whining to the world at large is surely enough. Let's move on, keep riding, restoring and maintaining our bikes, and have fun with our great club.

I'll be at Oley and Davenport if you or any other Club member would like to talk about your concerns, and I'm ready to respond elsewhere on this forum to questions about Board operations. Best regards.

[INLINE4NUT]

So after reading this Mr Socombe am I reading you right we should just stop talking about this and get on with YOUR agenda??? Why is it when something like this happens everyone how inmy opinion have something to hide or are ashamed of what they have taken part in they just want everyone to forget !! Im sorry but you and the rest of the board have not made a statement that really explains how we got here ! By doing this you all are guilty of degrading a wonderful club !! I for one have lost alot of interest in the club,I will still will stand on the sidelines and at some point Im sure I will stop paying dues (unless we take a more positive direction !) ! But I will not stop enjoying old bikes or owning them !!! Everything has a high and low point it seems we have reached a NEWLOW ! If nothing else Kevin and Robin deserve to leave with RESPECT which for the most part I havent seen to many on the other side show them !!!!! Gentlemen show RESPECT even in the most adverse situations!! Lets ALL try to be GENTLEMEN...its not a forgotten art !!!

[Steve Slocombe]

Dear Bob, your loyalty to your friends does you credit, but channeling these same baseless allegations in public does not.

For our earlier correspondents, I can report that Rocky did not shout at Kevin at the Eustis Board. I was there. Our procedures allow up to two Club members to be present as observers at Board Meetings given 30 days notice to the Secretary.

The Club was founded by four businessmen in 1954 so has always had part or full-time dealers on the Board. We have a written conflict of interest policy which is carefully followed. Copies are available from the Club Secretary.

In my opinion, it was the proposal that the judging system should grade the quality of number jobs which set the Board to reminding us that our purpose is to preserve a piece of motorcycling history rather than give out trophies to all and sundry. I note that some Eustis Winners' Circle bikes had not been started in years, and some other bikes were disqualified for bad numbers despite carrying previous judging awards.

Sitting in a nine hour meeting with eleven disparate and independent Board Members makes me think that engineering a conspiracy is a laughable idea.

We've given our previous Chief and Deputy Judges credit for their many years of support to our Club. Let's now move on with the new team and the new system. Perhaps some of the remarks on third-party forums can be reconsidered or even withdrawn.

I'm sure the new Chief and Deputy Chief Judges are happy to answer judging questions on this forum, and I have opinions too. I'm a big fan of Board Governance and Board Operations, and would be happy to try to answer Club members questions, but under a separate thread please.

[hackwing]

I think the thread is missing the real issue.

There are several key functions in the club that make it function. Judging rules are one of them. Now think about this for a moment; is there any office in city, county, state that doesn't have a recall clause.

Where is that clause in our club constitution?

Is there any city, state or county government in which key laws do not require a vote of the electorate?

Where is that in our constitution?

It would have been common decency to have sent out a notice to the entire membership that a rule change was up for adoption and if not a vote then a least a pole of the membership should have been taken to ascertain their consent or feels on the issue.

THE BOARD EXISTS TO SERVE THE MEMBERSHIP not the other way around.

The board took an issue which could have been "discussed" or "negotiated" and turned it into a conflict.

1. Its not clear there was a real issue, only 2 bikes were involved.

2. KEVIN NEVER RESIGNED! He left the room in order to cool off so as to return the discussion to a normal volume level.

3. There is no reason for raised voices in a "club" board meeting. As a past presiding officer of another hobby organization, yelling should be automatic cause for removal from the board including the president.

4. As a matter of principle, I have very strong feelings that no vendor who makes his living from the hobby should be allowed to be president of a hobby organization. The conflicts between business and position become ethically questionable. It is rumored that at least 2 board members have a financial business arrangement which might have affected their judgement in this matter.

5. As a matter of record, Kevin and Robin have brought more new members into this club than all the board members combined! Kevin, in his position, was the first one they called for information about how to participate in judging, and the last one they talked to when after the meet they had a question. The same is true of Robin. While Robin is more gregarious, Kevin tends to be, on the outside, a curmudgeon both have a heart of gold.

Other organizations search for decades to find "an honest man". In judging the club had two, not one!

The board has done a personal disservice to these two individuals. Both have been deeply hurt by the arrogant actions by two self serving board members.

Kevin and Robin deserve a public and personal apology from the "agitator" who instigated this unnecessary conflict and the "illustrious leader" who was not even gracious enough to look these two individuals in the eye and have a fact to fact discussion.

Just a member (who sure as hell wll not do any volunteer work for the current national administration)

[bmh]

Well all I know is this. Two meets have been held, and judged by two different sets of criteria. There are apparently no current published guidelines as to what is eligible to be judged or how it is to be done. Oley is only a few weeks away, wonder which rules will be in effect there? It would appear that the new leadership has a lot of work to do. While I do not have any more information than what I have read here, I certainly do believe this thing could have been handled in a much more positive and professional manner. But I also have my suspicions that there is a whole lot more to this than a concern for someone passing off phony bikes for judging. Why does everything always seem to be so cloak and dagger at that level?