Radio Free Registry

[Bill Sampson]

Tom:

Thanks to the "Gang of Three" for putting on an event like that. Such happenings are why Rosemary and I belong to car clubs. We're lucky to have the Porsche 356 Club here in SoCal where we'll participate more frequently once Rosemary retires. I'll add a drive to Georgia for your event if you continue to hold it to our bucket list. We enjoyed very much our drive (in a friend's SUV) through the mountains in GA to Brasstown Bald a couple of years ago.

[Steve Heinrichs]

Guys (and Gals),

Here are a couple of serious questions for all, including 356 Registry members who monitor this site---

So, tonight Gordon Maltby (why he and not a Trustee is odd---Gordon is the Magazine Editor and an officer but not the Secretary of the Registry) announces that the "filing" date to run for Trustee is now 11 October, not two days ago.

The question---

1) Do you think a member of the Registry should be informed as to the current status of litigation againsit the Registry and on behalf as well of its membership and the federal litigation against Registry officers and Trustees and former Trustee?

2) Do you think that a potential candidate for Trustee should be publically advised as to these matters and their potential impact of a member's decision to run?

Steve Heinrichs

[bbspdstr]

3) When will we, as members, hear from Registry trustees:

"We are so glad we can represent all members in the privileged position of your elected representatives and are very proud, as member volunteers, of how well we run the business of the club. Any member is welcome anytime to see how we do that, what we do and who does what. Comments and suggestions are always welcome, as well, as we always respect and appreciate ANY member input. We are here to serve, not merely govern, and always strive to make the 356 Registry the best car club it can be." (smiley face optional)

Personally, I'd like to replace the name 'trustees' or 'board members' with a more car-clubesque description of 'steering committee.' They would steer the club, but still welcome back-seat drivers who, when necessary, would yell...."HEY, look out!" before they hit the tree, bridge abutment, whatever.

[S.J.Szabo]

More fantasy: a de-centralized Club that provides a personal club experience for as many members as possible.

Wouldn't it be interesting if the Steering Committee of Club Central was composed of the elected Chairmen (instead of Presidents) of the Registry's actual local chapters, so that each is elected by those who know them best. All local elections would be administered and reported (to all Members) by an "arms-length" hired entity.

Board meetings would be electronic and "attendable" by any and all Members, who would be free to interact during regularly designated portions of the meeting.

All financials, maintained by a hired "arms-length" accounting firm, would be available for review online by any Member, at any time, for any reason.

Club Central would be prohibited from entering into any contract in the name of the Club without the express approval of 2/3 of the Membership.

The majority of the Member's dues would be spent on the full support of local chapters and events in addition to one annual and roaming nat'l Holiday. No more than 20% of the total revenue of the Club would be devoted to an online newsletter/magazine, available to Members only.

All Members would be automatic members of a local chapter, and outside of the continental U.S., prospective Members would have to establish a local chapter to have a portal to Membership, thus insuring that the principles of Fellowship are upheld.

What else?

[S.J.Szabo]

Act without accountability.

Never let the left hand know what the right hand is doing (any political simile is oddly coincidental).

Refuse to consider alternative behaviors or points of view. Interact with trusted sycophants only.

Refuse to discuss any actions with the Membership at large.

Deny the right of a Member to ask questions about actions. Punish them if they persist.

Deny the right of a Member to openly discuss his point of view with other Members.

Deny that the Members have any rights, legal or ethical, at all.



As they used to say decades ago, "Its a hell of a way to run a railroad."

[bbspdstr]

This post is sorta related to the Lit Up elsewhere, but not exactly.

I'm hoping Llew Kinst reads this Forum as well as the Registry version of all things 356, as I'm hoping he really doesn't believe the club as a whole will crash and burn or that if the Discovery directives are eventually enforced any member will be better off if they run away.

Llew and anyone reading; there can be nothing in the club 'database' that can't be gotten elsewhere, anyway, as recently posted here and there. It would be interesting to see how the one club officer's subcontracted (?) entity of magazine publishing and club membership is tied in with the 'database' of the club.....or are they one and the same?

The dust jacket above credits Llew for photography and design. I just happened to take the overhead shot of Brett's '55, as that was the theme for the various Porsche model series bookcovers. That was back when things were more fun, less paranoiac and more trust was felt among us all. It's a shame that what's causing the dissention now is involving a few with 'trust' in their title. I personally trust those same few will eventually earn trust back by doing the right thing for the club, as trust cannot be demanded or assumed and must stay current.

-Bruce Baker

[Steve Heinrichs]

Great cover design!!

I did not remember the credits.

Kudos!

Steve Heinrichs

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[S.J.Szabo]

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[MMW]

The above says it very well.

[S.J.Szabo]

[S.J.Szabo]

And now, back to the news...

These just in from Mr.Murray:

C J Murray
Post subject: Re: Keeping your 356 personal information private? PostPosted: Sat Oct 12, 2013 3:40 pm

I attended the Trustee meeting yesterday at the WCH. My take... Absolutely, positively, without equivocation, the only issue keeping the lawsuit from being settled right now is that the Trustees refuse to hand over the private data in the membership records. There is not any other request that they are unwilling to accommodate. Claims to the contrary made by SH and others are false, period. There was a lot of information given at the meeting that I wish the Trustees would post here but they are under attorney's instructions to keep quiet. Let me also say that a Porsche official attended the open Trustee meeting and expressed strongly the full support of the Porsche factory to the well being of our club. Porsche made a significant effort to mediate the SH situation so they are well aware of the facts and therefore their continued support is very gratifying and should be taken as an indication of the rightness of the club's actions. The Trustees take your privacy very seriously.



C J Murray
Post subject: Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update PostPosted: Sat Oct 12, 2013 4:17 pm

I attended the Trustee open meeting yesterday. The meeting was also attended by a Porsche factory representative. Many months ago Porsche assigned a high level executive to mediate between Mr. Heinrichs and the Trustees of our club. There was a lot of time and effort expended but ultimately two major problems remained. SH demanded to be given the private membership data and the confidential agreement between Porsche and our club. All Porsche agreements with all Porsche clubs are confidential. Our club agreed to let SH see the agreement if Porsche also agreed but that is against Porsche policy. So, the only demand that remains unacceptable to our club is the release of the membership records and private information related to the membership records. It was also noted that the financial aspect of the membership records could be disclosed by a certification of the membership head count which the club has always been willing to provide. The current number is around 7200.

I would summarize it this way... Porsche has intimate knowledge of the situation and worked very hard to mediate. At the open meeting the Porsche representative made it very clear that Porsche supports our club. I am quite positive that the Trustees speaking at the meeting were not lying in front of the Porsche representative who has intimate knowledge of the situation and would like the lawsuit to come to a quick end. Porsche would not support our club position if they felt that the Trustees were unreasonably drawing out the litigation that does nothing positive for the Porsche brand.theirfull support of the Porsche factory to the well being of our club.facts.

And to think there were so many who were sure the "" shtick was going to be just another dog and pony show.....

As reporting goes, the first you could have a bright future on Fox News, tho the second "you" should do the scripts.

And that's all the news that's fit to print for now. Watch this space for further developments.

And bring a friend.

[MMW]

I hope most of you are patient with the change that is occurring at the Registry. Nothing will happen overnight. Compare the discussions over there of the last few weeks with what was happening one year ago & you can see a difference. In the past, posts & even whole threads would just disappear with no explanation & now that doesn't seem to be happening. Members are actually questioning what is going on, discussing the pros & cons of Facebook, etc. Of course still some dis-information is being posted & not many answers given but you can't expect it to happen all at once. Even "open members meetings" have come about because of all this. Not saying they are perfect but it is more than they had 3 years ago. Keep on doing what you are doing as it is slowly working.