Howdy all you all,
We have talked about horses before, and, we have talked about the website
before, but, at the risk of beating a dead horse... I offer the following
for your consideration...
There was a complete back up of the website at the end of 2011 and provided to
the director and historian in January, 2012; this is not something I was asked
to do, rather, something I had been doing annually since 2007... just standard
operating procedure, and, seemed like the thing to do, so, I did it.
In January the board, who represents the club, told me to remove the
advertising from the website... I said I could remove it but that deleting the
code is much easier creating the code and suggested it may make more sense to
have the folks who solicited the original ads to check with the advertisers
about renewing their ad before I delete the code... hence the delay in deleting
the advertising... apparently a real pisser for the board... but... not near as
much of a pisser if I had deleted it and then been asked to re-create it!!!...
it was deleted all in due time...
And, early in 2012 I was told "the club" wanted to change the website
implementation because nobody else in the club knew enough to maintain the
site, and, if the site were modified such that the webmaster did not have to do
anything then I would not be "held hostage" by the club to maintain the site.
- To that end I was asked to research free WYSIWYG (wiz-e-wig, What-You-See-
Is-What-You-Get) editors that would allow the creation of web pages that
support each officer's position such that the webmaster would no longer be
required to perform updates, e.g., instead of the webmaster posting pictures,
the photographer would be able to have a menu driven web based application to
allow the uploading, layout and commenting on pictures for a ride.
- There was a meeting in February with the director and assistant director to
discuss the results of my WYSIWYG research, and, my conclusion was that there
were no WYSIWYG editors that gave you what you thought you would get, i.e.,
what-you-see-is-not-necessarily-what-you-get, and, writing code to implement
such a web application would be a huge task, so, no, there was not a simple
free solution for their proposed idea that I was aware of.
There were the requests to update the Ride-O-Meter which were promptly handled,
and requests to fix the occasional discovered bugs which were also promptly
Also in January I was asked to add Riders Hand Signals
document to the Group Riding Guide... done the same day.
The following day in January I was asked to put the
revision date as the "version #" for the Constitution
and Bylaws on the website, viz., November 17, 2010...
done the same day.
- Site Map page enabled.
- Additions for members to the
For Sale page.
- RCHR USPS address added to
- Upload function fixed and
- Previous years hit counts
moved to linked page.
- Previous years ride-o-meters
moved to linked page.
- Previous years attendance moved
to historical page.
In March the board, who represents the club, told me to remove the "Watch Your
Six" link at the top of the home page, to which I said that it was a safety
notice and I regularly modified the color or font or wording to catch folks
attention and keep them aware of the great danger it was linked to, and, I said
that I had no problem removing it if there was some other important safety item
that I could put in its place. There was nothing supplied and the requests to
remove the "Six" notice continued... right along with the "six" incidents on
RCHR rides with bikes going down!
WATCH YOUR SIX!... all the time...
If this event hasn't changed your intersection habits THEN RE-EXAMINE THIS EVENT!
( click here for the consequences of not watching your six )
SO THERE YOU HAVE IT... and... at the "special board meeting" there were
several folks (some not board members) who were all pushed out of shape
about the following facts:
- although the membership did not ask for the board to modify the website,
the board represents/speaks for the membership and the board said change it.
- Webmaster failure to do what the board says is against the constitution.
- Webmaster would not do what the board said to do.
Now, I hope "the board" believes they were acting in what they felt was best
for the membership (maybe there was another agenda), but, I stood by and will
continue to stand by what I thought was best for the membership.
THE BOTTOM LINE... I performed all that was asked EXCEPT I would not
remove the "Six" notice because I hoped it would save one of you from a
bad situation, and, so, since "the webmaster" would not do what was demanded,
"the board," who represents the club, decided to get a contractor to redo the
website... and then the "Six" notice would be gone...
EXCEPT... when I am elected, count on the "Six" notice being back!
And, possibly a requirement of the safety officer to provide a monthly or
bi-monthly bullet item of equally grave importance.
P.S. for those of you who could not attend the November general meeting, there
was a presentation on CLARIFICATION OF MISINFORMATION REGARDING THE WEBSITE
which announced that the problem was not that the membership did not like the
website although that is the impression the board, which represents the
membership, presented to me, and, that it became necessary to hire a contractor
because of alllllll the problems with the webmaster not performing as requested
by the board, who represents the club, as required by the constitution (see all
the things above), following which there were a few comments from members,
e.g., an objection to such an important/expensive decision being made without
informing the general membership, to which a reiteration of the fact that the
board meetings are open to the general membership... hence my platform plank in
support of board meeting agendas being sent to the general membership PRIOR to
a board meeting so those who want to know more can attend BEFORE it becomes
history. When the comments died down I raised my hand to correct some
misinformation presented in the misinformation presentation, viz., the
following three points.
1) Why I resigned from the board in 2011 - it was stated that I left because of
disagreements with the board - not so; do not recall any disagreements with the
board in that time frame (besides the board's unwillingness to get Directors
and Officers insurance); I resigned from the board for the same reason that I
resigned from the board of John A. Sutter Outpost 1841 - LIABILITY... since
then the outpost has gotten DNO insurance and I am serving on the board again,
w.r.t. RCHR, as 2011 came to an end I became aware of a court case that was
ruled on, appealed, ruled on again, appealed again and ruled on again which
said that a rider cannot sue for being injured on a group motorcycle ride
because riding a motorcycle is inherently dangerous - falls under the primary
assumption of risk doctrine, and so I advised the board that I would be willing
to resume my position on the board if the board was so inclined - the board was
and so I did; note that all during the time that I had resigned and no longer
had my name affiliated with RCHR I continued to maintain the website.
2) The meeting in February - it was stated that the meeting was held because of
disagreements with the board and how to get items the board wanted done
completed - negatory; I do not know why anyone would say it was held because of
disagreements with the board, I was aware of none, maybe it was disagreements
among other board members, but, the implication was that it was disagreements
with the board and me - not so; the meeting was held because of the reasons stated above!
3) The abuse of power when I posted a newsletter article on the website that
the editor had refused to include in the newsletter...
- true: I sent a webmaster's report to the editor
- true: the editor never replied to me that she received it
- true: the editor never replied that she was not going to publish it
- so, when the editor sent me the newsletter for posting and I realized that my
report was missing I just thought the editor never received it or it was an
oversight, so, I posted my report in another link with the newsletter...
granted I probably should have asked but I didn't... and I have sent reports
and articles to the editor since that have been denied publication and that is
fine, the editor can publish what ever the editor feels should be published,
but, don't say that the editor told me my content was denied and so I posted it
anyway when that was not the case.
- if you did not see my May 2012 report then check it out... I thought it was
funny... maybe I'm just sick... well here is a link to it:
So, yes, I posted my report, but, don't accuse me of being told by the
editor that my report was unacceptable and posting-it-anyway when that
was just - not so.
I certainly hope all you all are up to speed now on the website; there is a
whole multitude of facts and information that has not been supplied in this
email and the previous email of "27OCT12: Webmaster ... what happened?" but
if you really still have comments or questions then let's hear them...
you may qualify for the Beat A Dead Horse Award!!!
Would you like to know more?...
In March I completed modifying
the database to accept longer
event descriptions, and,
provided some graphics (and
instructions for using the
graphics) to spice up the
event calendar entries.
Check out what Raz's platform will do for you...
click here to visit RCHR RESTORATION ELECTION CENTRAL
Click here to make a campaign contribution
Contributions or gifts to VOTE4RAZ are not tax deductible.
|If you don't like the way things are gong in the RCHR then CHANGE "IT"|
VOTE 4 RAZ at the RCHR December 6 meeting !!!