Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?

Expand Messages
  • adriangrayfr
    As both a Moderator of this Group and a long-serving member of the Association s Management Committee I would like to comment upon the message below. However,
    Message 1 of 7 , Dec 8, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      As both a Moderator of this Group and a long-serving member of the Association's Management Committee I would like to comment upon the message below.
      However, I must emphasise that I am NOT criticising Michael personally.

      Even though this Group is not an authorised method of communicating with the Association's officers Michael's ORIGINAL message was, in my view, legitimate as it was very general and could have been answered by any other member of the Association.

      However, the content of his response to David Charlesworth, saying that he had emailed and then posted here does give rise to the following remarks.

      Although we all expect emails to elicit instant responses we should all be very aware that those who serve the Association, whether in management or functional roles do so AS VOLUNTEERS. As such we have our own lives to live and some of us also have health preoccupations.

      Taking Michael's situation as an example. An email sent on a Friday might have arrived while an Officer was away for the weekend with his family, while he was away at an exhibition or even while he was having a holiday. For myself, I am fully employed and quite frequently away from home, often abroad, for several days each week on business and I am unlikely to have the time or inclination to try to deal with Association affairs from some remote terminal where I may not have all the information to hand, nor be able to deal with things.
      Therefore, I suggest, it is unrealistic to expect a reply in such a short period of time, especially over a weekend.
      In the normal course of events I would ask that Officers are allowed five WORKING days to respond to enquiries.
      After that it is reasonable to repeat the message and to include a copy to another Association Officer, preferably the Chairman or Secretary.
      As a general principle I quite often use the 'Read Receipt' option because then I know a message has been received. If no action or answer is then forthcoming I feel more justified in sending extra messages to provoke a response!
      Even if the Officer still fails to respond this Group is not the forum to try to obtain a response. As I wrote earlier, there are other members of the Committee and several appointed Officers who should be approached instead. All our addresses are in the box in every Narrow Lines and (I hope!!) there are links on the Association website.

      Phew, got that off my chest!! :-)

      Adrian - moderating gently.



      --- In 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com, michael lee <mick7ng@...> wrote:
      >
      > Thank you David
      >  
      > I had emailed Friday but got no reply so asked on the Group.
      >  
      > Regards Mike Lee
      >
      > --- On Tue, 7/12/10, David <dinas-junction@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > From: David <dinas-junction@...>
      > Subject: RE: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?
      > To: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Tuesday, 7 December, 2010, 14:37
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      >
      > Mike
      >
      > I am sorry your NN is missing, spare copy in post tomorrow.
      >
      > David Charlesworth
      >
      > Mem Sec
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com [mailto:7mmnga@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
      > mick7ng
      > Sent: 07 December 2010 11:29
      > To: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?
      >
      > I have recently received my copy of 'Narrow Lines 186' but did not receive a
      > copy of 'Narrow News' which is normally included. Can anbody tell me if a
      > 'Narrow News' was included in NL 186 please?
      >
      > Regards Mike Lee.
      >
      > -----
      >
      > No virus found in this message.
      >
      > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      >
      > Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3301 - Release Date: 12/06/10
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • michael lee
      In my defence may I say   a/  I replied to Davids email, I did not know/realise it would go on the web, I apologise. b/  I waited 5 days. ( I thought the
      Message 2 of 7 , Dec 9, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        In my defence may I say
         
        a/  I "replied" to Davids email, I did not know/realise it would go on the web, I apologise.

        b/  I waited 5 days. ( I thought the whole idea of the anonymous addresses to the Association was so that if a committee member was unavailable somebody else could pick up the message???).
         
        Mike Lee (End of Story).
         
         

        --- On Wed, 8/12/10, adriangrayfr <adrian@...> wrote:


        From: adriangrayfr <adrian@...>
        Subject: Re: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?
        To: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Wednesday, 8 December, 2010, 21:50


         



        As both a Moderator of this Group and a long-serving member of the Association's Management Committee I would like to comment upon the message below.
        However, I must emphasise that I am NOT criticising Michael personally.

        Even though this Group is not an authorised method of communicating with the Association's officers Michael's ORIGINAL message was, in my view, legitimate as it was very general and could have been answered by any other member of the Association.

        However, the content of his response to David Charlesworth, saying that he had emailed and then posted here does give rise to the following remarks.

        Although we all expect emails to elicit instant responses we should all be very aware that those who serve the Association, whether in management or functional roles do so AS VOLUNTEERS. As such we have our own lives to live and some of us also have health preoccupations.

        Taking Michael's situation as an example. An email sent on a Friday might have arrived while an Officer was away for the weekend with his family, while he was away at an exhibition or even while he was having a holiday. For myself, I am fully employed and quite frequently away from home, often abroad, for several days each week on business and I am unlikely to have the time or inclination to try to deal with Association affairs from some remote terminal where I may not have all the information to hand, nor be able to deal with things.
        Therefore, I suggest, it is unrealistic to expect a reply in such a short period of time, especially over a weekend.
        In the normal course of events I would ask that Officers are allowed five WORKING days to respond to enquiries.
        After that it is reasonable to repeat the message and to include a copy to another Association Officer, preferably the Chairman or Secretary.
        As a general principle I quite often use the 'Read Receipt' option because then I know a message has been received. If no action or answer is then forthcoming I feel more justified in sending extra messages to provoke a response!
        Even if the Officer still fails to respond this Group is not the forum to try to obtain a response. As I wrote earlier, there are other members of the Committee and several appointed Officers who should be approached instead. All our addresses are in the box in every Narrow Lines and (I hope!!) there are links on the Association website.

        Phew, got that off my chest!! :-)

        Adrian - moderating gently.

        --- In 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com, michael lee <mick7ng@...> wrote:
        >
        > Thank you David
        >  
        > I had emailed Friday but got no reply so asked on the Group.
        >  
        > Regards Mike Lee
        >
        > --- On Tue, 7/12/10, David <dinas-junction@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > From: David <dinas-junction@...>
        > Subject: RE: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?
        > To: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com
        > Date: Tuesday, 7 December, 2010, 14:37
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        > Mike
        >
        > I am sorry your NN is missing, spare copy in post tomorrow.
        >
        > David Charlesworth
        >
        > Mem Sec
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com [mailto:7mmnga@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        > mick7ng
        > Sent: 07 December 2010 11:29
        > To: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?
        >
        > I have recently received my copy of 'Narrow Lines 186' but did not receive a
        > copy of 'Narrow News' which is normally included. Can anbody tell me if a
        > 'Narrow News' was included in NL 186 please?
        >
        > Regards Mike Lee.
        >
        > -----
        >
        > No virus found in this message.
        >
        > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        >
        > Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3301 - Release Date: 12/06/10
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >











        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • adriangrayfr
        Michael, No defence was needed, I did say that I wasn t picking on you!! However, please note that I did write five WORKING days . As you say - end of story
        Message 3 of 7 , Dec 9, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Michael,

          No defence was needed, I did say that I wasn't picking on you!!
          However, please note that I did write "five WORKING days".

          As you say - end of story now!

          Adrian



          --- In 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com, michael lee <mick7ng@...> wrote:
          >
          > In my defence may I say
          >  
          > a/  I "replied" to Davids email, I did not know/realise it would go on the web, I apologise.
          >
          > b/  I waited 5 days. ( I thought the whole idea of the anonymous addresses to the Association was so that if a committee member was unavailable somebody else could pick up the message???).
          >  
          > Mike Lee (End of Story).
          >  
          >  
          >
          > --- On Wed, 8/12/10, adriangrayfr <adrian@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > From: adriangrayfr <adrian@...>
          > Subject: Re: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?
          > To: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com
          > Date: Wednesday, 8 December, 2010, 21:50
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          > As both a Moderator of this Group and a long-serving member of the Association's Management Committee I would like to comment upon the message below.
          > However, I must emphasise that I am NOT criticising Michael personally.
          >
          > Even though this Group is not an authorised method of communicating with the Association's officers Michael's ORIGINAL message was, in my view, legitimate as it was very general and could have been answered by any other member of the Association.
          >
          > However, the content of his response to David Charlesworth, saying that he had emailed and then posted here does give rise to the following remarks.
          >
          > Although we all expect emails to elicit instant responses we should all be very aware that those who serve the Association, whether in management or functional roles do so AS VOLUNTEERS. As such we have our own lives to live and some of us also have health preoccupations.
          >
          > Taking Michael's situation as an example. An email sent on a Friday might have arrived while an Officer was away for the weekend with his family, while he was away at an exhibition or even while he was having a holiday. For myself, I am fully employed and quite frequently away from home, often abroad, for several days each week on business and I am unlikely to have the time or inclination to try to deal with Association affairs from some remote terminal where I may not have all the information to hand, nor be able to deal with things.
          > Therefore, I suggest, it is unrealistic to expect a reply in such a short period of time, especially over a weekend.
          > In the normal course of events I would ask that Officers are allowed five WORKING days to respond to enquiries.
          > After that it is reasonable to repeat the message and to include a copy to another Association Officer, preferably the Chairman or Secretary.
          > As a general principle I quite often use the 'Read Receipt' option because then I know a message has been received. If no action or answer is then forthcoming I feel more justified in sending extra messages to provoke a response!
          > Even if the Officer still fails to respond this Group is not the forum to try to obtain a response. As I wrote earlier, there are other members of the Committee and several appointed Officers who should be approached instead. All our addresses are in the box in every Narrow Lines and (I hope!!) there are links on the Association website.
          >
          > Phew, got that off my chest!! :-)
          >
          > Adrian - moderating gently.
          >
          > --- In 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com, michael lee <mick7ng@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Thank you David
          > >  
          > > I had emailed Friday but got no reply so asked on the Group.
          > >  
          > > Regards Mike Lee
          > >
          > > --- On Tue, 7/12/10, David <dinas-junction@> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > From: David <dinas-junction@>
          > > Subject: RE: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?
          > > To: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com
          > > Date: Tuesday, 7 December, 2010, 14:37
          > >
          > >
          > >  
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Mike
          > >
          > > I am sorry your NN is missing, spare copy in post tomorrow.
          > >
          > > David Charlesworth
          > >
          > > Mem Sec
          > >
          > > -----Original Message-----
          > > From: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com [mailto:7mmnga@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          > > mick7ng
          > > Sent: 07 December 2010 11:29
          > > To: 7mmnga@yahoogroups.com
          > > Subject: [7mm NGA] Narrow Lines 186, Narrow News missing?
          > >
          > > I have recently received my copy of 'Narrow Lines 186' but did not receive a
          > > copy of 'Narrow News' which is normally included. Can anbody tell me if a
          > > 'Narrow News' was included in NL 186 please?
          > >
          > > Regards Mike Lee.
          > >
          > > -----
          > >
          > > No virus found in this message.
          > >
          > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
          > >
          > > Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3301 - Release Date: 12/06/10
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.