Radio Free Registry

[JTR70]

You look way overdressed. I thought for sure you'd summit in your signature flip-flops, shorts and a t-shirt.

[213532]

No Hawaiian shirt?!

Way to go, Bill!

[S.J.Szabo]

Same Old Shuck and Jive

[DG58INNM]

Following the stuff on the R site of course. The dust up over Holidays doesn't seem as egregious as some other recent issues. I can accept that there is no one correct way to do this. Obviously the Registry wants to encourage people to volunteer to put on holidays. Its a very fine line to walk between encouragement and control. I think they are still feeling their way in the modern world where attorneys and contracts lurk behind every little moment of fun we try to have. I'm going to give them the benefit of doubt on this one. I do wonder though, why Mr. Chieffo is now in attendance at open member meetings? I would assume he is being paid to attend.

Poor CJ, banging his head against the wall on term limits is a different matter. I give him credit for trying. The trustee response is predictable, though Sad.

But saddest of all was the Steve Heinrichs debacle. No one yet has mentioned what I am certain was the real reason for pulling the original post. That Mr. Chieffo and the trustees asserted in their court filings a belief that Mr. Heinrichs was faking lung cancer as a part of his effort to harass the Registry. It proves that they were conducting themselves, well, exactly in the manner they were accusing Mr. Heinrichs of behaving.

Probably soon I will follow the path of Bruce and many others, and just let my membership lapse. Although, since the court has ruled that members are entitled to view such, I am tempted to make an open request for financial records and registry contracts before I do.

BTW, after summiting Wheeler Peak, Bill and Rosemary stopped by to visit. Enjoyed meeting them in person. Nice folks!

Bill and Rosemary, with Cha's funky green targa, in beautiful downtown Bernalillo.


DG

[Bill Sampson]

Well stated David. As usual you're on point although I don't think I'll ever feel any sympathy for Murray given his past behavior. He's on the right side on term limits though.

It was a pleasure meeting you in person finally. For you other folks Rosemary and I thought that that "funky" Targa depicted in the photo next to an old man and his pretty lady was pretty nice. Sorry we missed Cha. Next time. Maybe we'll join Zia.

Rosemary is at 38 highpoints and wants to get to 40 before signing off and asked me which 2 I thought she could most readily finish. I told her Wheeler was one despite the elevation, so David, we hope to be back and that you can go with us. We may even do it as a backpack, stopping and staying at Williams Lake as an assist to Rosemary. The area near the peak is beautiful by the way you other readers.

[Phil Planck]

Bill
You 2 consider 100 ft a "high point"? I would never show a picture of myself at just 100 ft. for a high point.

[Bill Sampson]

Well ok Phil, NOW you've done it. The picture of the woodie and the coupe is actually at elevation of about 50 feet. BUT, since you brought up low elevation, we'll be in Annapolis (elevation 0) on Rosemary's 70th birthday next week and are looking for interesting things to do. [We have already "conquered" Maryland's highpoint, accessible only through West Virginia as you'd expect.]

We're finally going to get to Camden Yards the night before but will be in the area about a week. What should we do? We'll doubtless go to the opening of the new Smithsonian African American History Museum and our daughter will join us and DEMAND crab cakes so I'm guessing an Eastern Shore excursion will take place also. Any 356 events, garages, etc to see? I believe we have rented a genuine Ford Focus which should wow all the car guys in the area.

Since I have now totally wandered off topic - sorry all, anyone want me to gather term limit petition signatures?

[S.J.Szabo]

notany

[bbspdstr]

Bill! I am unaware of your Annapolis time or when you sent the previous posts, but the bigger-and-growing Ski Roundtop swap meet is tomorrow, 9-17-16. The link is :

www.VintageGermanSwapMeet.com

It is south of Harrisburg, PA off Rt 83, a straight shot from Baltimore.

One draw this year is that Tim Kuser's 904 will be present, finally drivable. Long-delayed for one reason or another all the years since by various persons and shops involved, I straightened the core frame in '75 or '76, as it was bought by Tim as a "racing wreck." I have had the privilege of working on various parts of the car since, off and on, and hope to get a brief ride....if I can squeeze into the FIA "passenger seat." (Hell, I was able to squeeze in under the dash dressed like a space-man doing frp work, so it's now about 20 years later and I don't "squeeze" as well ANYWHERE.)

Of course, there will be in excess of 6 acres of cars and parts, all, as the slogan sez, "aircooled."

Last-minute Bruce, (planning to see you in Hershey's AACA meca next month.)

[Bill Sampson]

Thanks Bruce. See you in Hershey - or nearby. We'll be in the Annapolis area next week for about 9 days. On the 17th I'll be at Wavecrest, the biggest woodie show with close to 300 wood cars, in Encinitas - meaning in one week I go from the Best Coast to the Least Coast. I'd love to see the 904 but our corporate pilot for Sampson Intergalactic Enterprises has the weekend off.

[Phil Planck]

Way off topic - sorry. Bill, enjoy the woody show, and don't get low altitude sickness.
Phil

[bbspdstr]

Here's me with 904/014. I'll post a little more in the Events section.

[S.J.Szabo]

Woo, Woo, Woooonothing

[bbspdstr]

The answer to me is simple: Money. And "Might makes Right" and if anyone notices the incongruities or lack of TOTAL transparency, they are either summarily dismissed or shunned by those few Members with The Power. Perhaps one is cajoled early on, but if that doesn't work, the allegorical door is slammed in one's face..."with attitude."

Why else would there be (allegedly open but) closed books, even though the late Steve Heinrichs' suit exposed that any records of the Corporation are legally completely open to any Member. Steve asked CPA type questions, pointedly, and had the door slammed in his face, with attitude, and he told me that "pissed him off" and began his now-famous legal battle with the trustees. If cancer had not taken him, that would still be going on until he was satisfied the Registry was being run "by the book."

(It has been said "over there" that Steve sued the Registry. Bill may correct me, but I believe he sued the trustees and officers individually, not the club. He went for the source of the issues, not the members.)

Why are so many summarized money items unclear as to how much went where for what. After all of the disruptive allegations and denials, why isn't there a copy of the club's check book register available to any Member who requests one? As Joel Jensen so aptly posted; "If there is nothing to hide, why are (they) hiding it?"

If offered, it can be assumed that there would not be many requests.

Wouldn't Member input be not just welcomed but solicited if there was nothing to hide? Wouldn't those in Power want to get rid of the accountant's negative CYA opening statements in the annual summarized financial statements and have a real audit based on "generally accepted accounting principles"..... if they didn't need the added smoke and mirrors?

Isn't it odd that there is not a retention crusade for Members instead of merely the focus on recruiting new Members? It is hoped that the "malcontents" (like me) just fade away....after a mere 40 years in the Registry, chairing two Holidays and a quest for a board seat and theoretically fighting for a "better Registry."

"Can't make trouble if they aren't members" and yet we know that some in the Registry read posts such as S.J., Bill Sampson and others (like me) make. Is it just a few who "won't let go"? It runs deeper than that if this is being read here now by Registry members....and that is our hope.

Sorry to dray on, but why are Members disallowed from a REAL trustee meeting? I suggested that with boards on which I have sat (that represented far less than 7,000 people), "Executive Sessions" were scheduled within a meeting's agenda where the sensitive issues were handled and decorum was not at risk even if unexpected. All of what is discussed behind closed doors by the trustees is "sensitive"?

I was told; "Oh, we just do the club's housekeeping and you'd be bored." I said I would not be bored OR disruptive and I was then told that I may ask questions that would maybe possibly kinda sorta make a trustee miss a flight back home, so "NO!"

Now, it seems they have "Open Meetings" (with some trustees who attend a Registry function)....as a Q&A.....but a mere member may not, cannot sit in on a trustee business meeting.

"Why" questions have always been abundant in or concerning the affairs of the Registry...but with too few validated answers. Eventually, those in Power have had to placate a growing recognition of perennial questions raised over the last 10 or so years and wait for a calm to be restored while still automatically maligning those who pose the questions. Lots of deflection, too. Always. Why is that necessary? Who is represented by the trustees?

The latest is the Holiday thread. Many years ago, when I was still in the Registry, the trustees were talking about actually hosting or chairing Holidays more local to them. That was obviously dropped and then "mentors" were assigned to any local organizing committee for a Holiday. There was also much awareness back then of the local regional PCA Parade committees being pissed that they did all the planning and work and having the National officers attend and hog all the limelight and credit for the event. (One thing about PCA; they generally seem to take note of rumblings in the troops and correct real or perceived transgressions.)

Reflecting on what I just wrote, I suppose the real answer is as much "why" (and "who") as it is "money." It's just a car club that could be run MUCH better without having those two or three words rolling off the tongue so easily, so quickly.

Meanwhile, thanks to Justin for the Soapbox Section he allows.

Bruce Baker

[Bill Sampson]

Bruce:

I made what will presumably be my last post on updating the litigation in the litigation update thread. The original suit - and the one on which the only judgment on the merits has been entered - was against 356 Registry, Inc., an Ohio corporation, only and not that organization's officers and trustees.

The "personal suits" on all sides were all dismissed before resolution. Those personal suits include the first one filed about a month after the original suit that was brought in the name of 356 Registry, Inc., although it is obvious from reading it that it included personal claims of the officers and trustees against Steve. That's an interesting use of the members' resources but that's what the "leaders" chose to do.

As Bruce suggests the Heinrichs way was to do it open and above board and by the book, which is clearly not the trustee way.