BVF
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Proposed change of BVF name

+23
Mike McEwan
Richardn
Anthony Silver
Michael Compton
luce
Caryl Oliver
geoffsilverman
Carl Morris
Eddie Munster
JRM
McK
Dicky B
Jacques
Mariette Mason
PeteEames
PLS-F
AM Steiner
Giles
charlesh9
Jane Hutchison
Roman2
grahamrpaul
TheEpee70
27 posters
Go down
avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-07-31
Age : 62
Location : Bury St Edmunds
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:21 pm
It may have been Ed Muster who came up with the "over 40's" concept.  In itself probably the least contentious alternative etc.....  

However just one point - the Veterans does cover 4 x age categories, so to adopt the numbering system would entail either Over 40's Cat 1,2,3,4 or Over 40's, Over 50's Over 60's and Over 70's, so maybe not that workable.
avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-06-12
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Fri Aug 06, 2021 8:26 pm
Reading the reply to John Crouch's objections to the proposed name change, I note the following:
We are told that the name change will allow us to march into the future. It seems strange that an idea from the past (the 1970s) will take us into the future. Company name changing is now largely the province of companies attempting to avoid their liabilities and fraudsters. The reply also seems to believe that all name changes are successful ... have we forgotten Snickers and Consignia?
Age UK is also mentioned as a name change from Help the Aged. The latter, together with Age Concern and a host of other organisations with differing charitable status came together some years ago to avoid competition for donations. Age UK is simply an umbrella organisation which allocates funds to the other age related charities. Our equivalent would be Sport England.
Allegations that a change to Masters would make more money, appeal to younger fencers and be a positive move are unsupported.

Anthony Silver likes this post

avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-06-12
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Fri Aug 06, 2021 6:09 pm
Before any name change is agreed I believe that the views of our founder and life president should be considered. What is his opinion?
avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-08-03
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Tue Aug 03, 2021 10:50 pm
I've read through a lot of the information and opinions on here, and pleased to read that others have picked up on and are reflective of my own opinions on this.
'Master' for me implies a level of professionl aptitude and experience earned over a career in a sport, such as in tennis or football. Just because one is 'older' does not make one more able or skillful.
Moreover, a fencing 'Master' is a recognised title already within the sport which takes time, dedication and skill to acheive - and as such, I feel should be continued to be recognised as a clear and distinct acheivement.

Just because you're old, doesn't make you a Master of anything!!

I've never had a issue with being called a Veteran.
I actively looked forward to my 40th birthday, and the start of the next part of my enjoyment of the sport we all love.
The name would make no difference to me one way or another in terms of my participation or engagement - other than I don't like idea of 'Masters fencing' being applied to me as I am not a fully qualified Maitre.

The word 'Veteran' to me implies tenacity, longevity, experience and comradeship - all of which I think are quite relevant to fencing for the over 40's! - without necessarily implying or indicating a level of aptitude. I wouldn't say that 'Masters' is elitist, but misleading in my own understanding of the word, and certainly within our sport, it already means something else.

When I talk to non-fencers, I have to explain what 'Veterans' fencing is / means. I'm not sure if anyone ever got confused about whether or not I'd had a military career, but I don't think so...
Would this be any different if we used the term 'Masters'?
I very much doubt it...I'm still going to have to explain it, and then moreover that not everyone who fences in it is a 'master of fencing'.

I can see that there are those who share my opinion already, and then there are those who believe the change is necessary and justified. Either way, I don't think writing on here will change anyone else's opinion, nor will it change my level of participation in the sport I love, other than I'll feel a bit embarrassed to describe myself as a 'Master' to anyone else!!
avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:35 pm
There are good arguments from a number of sensible people who are all passionate about wanting the best for our sport, and our particular segment.
I took the discussion to the club, asking fencers of various ages whether the name would make any difference to their participation in over 40s fencing. The response was no, other influences: family, career etc have a greater impact on their time, reference to being a veteran is more an excuse than the root cause.
As others have posted, we need to consider our offer: what do members, and potential members want from our organisation?
I would suggest that greater integration with events, either the Hampshire model for senior opens or taking the opportunity to have over 40 events alongside LPJS or similar may offer the fencing parent a reason to join in.
We've been accepted by the FIE, we should be partnered more closely, but not governed by BF
avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:39 pm
The term "Master" shouldn't be considered sexist. There are High Court Masters of both gender. Female Masters are still addressed as "Master".
avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-06-11
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Name change

Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:11 pm
There have been lots of good comments on both sides and Carl was right to encourage discussion through this forum. I have to say that I had not considered the term "Masters" to be non-inclusive, but in today's environment should we be suggesting a name change that is sexist?
avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-08-02
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:06 pm
In my opinion we are arguing about the wrong thing and the assertion that there are only 2 choices for a name fails to address this completely. Changing the name will not result in a surge of interest from newly 40 existing fencers or attract non fencers in droves. Neither will it suddenly put us on the radar for wads of cash from a hitherto unidentified sponsor. Personally I think our efforts should be focused on further integrating with our NGB, British Fencing, and becoming what we actually are i.e. a number of age categories of the sport of fencing similar to Cadets, Juniors, U23, Seniors etc.... Whilst needing a committee to oversee the specifics of the veteran categories and competitions this does not need to be a separate organisation IMO and is what is done for those other age categories I mentioned above. We are at odds with the vast majority of our overseas brethren in having a separate Veterans fencing body. Most of these other NGB's have embraced their veterans into their structures. This extends to the FIE where there has now been for a number of years a veterans commission alongside the various other operational commissions they have. Point to note - they are all described as Veterans and I don't think the FIE will suddenly stop referring to the World Champs as Veterans for our age groups. So in changing our name we would inevitably end up at odds with the rest of the world.
It is also the case that most fencers first interaction with fencing will be through a club where everyone is a fencer. Age groups and the description veteran only become relevant for competition. I describe myself as a fencer, not a veteran fencer. I don't fence with other veteran fencers in my club although there may be some. I fence other fencers.
We need to be a part of fencing, specifically British Fencing.

John Crouch, Anthony Silver and mudhurst like this post

avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-07-30
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:14 pm
When I returned to fencing in 2005, the Veterans I met were all former fencers. Henry de Silva told me he was very clear what he wanted in forming the Vets - an opportunity for older fencers to compete on a level playing field. He succeeded, but now we follow a bigger and bolder vision - to open up to all in our age group, giving our friends and the wider community the opportunity to share in our experience. However there is a barrier - the term Veteran doesn't work for some. The proposed alternative of Masters doesn't work for others. Market research would be great, but we don't have the resources to sponsor this - and as a minority sport, would we ever get enough data to get statistically-significant results? For myself, I don't need market research - if a member of my fencing family tells me they have negative feelings to a particular term, I am not going to question their right to have those feelings. Instead, I propose we change the narrative. I said at the last AGM that what is important to me is that we are seen as one of the age groups within fencing, not as something separate from the main body. With that in mind, I thought back to when I started fencing, and was in an age group called Under 20s. We never bothered with a different term and were all happy using that. So now, what would be the challenges if we just call ourselves the Over 40s, and let that become the accepted term that defines us?

John Crouch, PLS-F and mudhurst like this post

avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-07-31
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty An unnecessary change

Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:38 pm
All the arguments have been well and truly aired on this and John Crouch has summed up the situation very clearly in his response. Therefore, I just want to make my position clear as I will not be attending the AGM or EGM and there will not be allowed to vote.
I am completely against this unnecessary name change.
avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-07-31
Age : 62
Location : Bury St Edmunds
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Proposed change to BVF name

Sat Jul 31, 2021 8:51 am
Too many Brands suffering declining appeal are tempted to play with the design and name of their brand. Thankfully this gives us the opportunity to learn from other people’s (expensive) mistakes before making our own.

First let me say that both John Crouch and Carl Morris’s papers are well thought out and each has a compelling case to make. That BVF needs to make some changes is indisputable, what changes need to be made is a far tougher question to answer.

Although a name change may be required it would need to be a part of a whole package of change, I do not believe that anyone would accept the argument that all BVF has to do is to change their name in order to become more appealing. Examples such as Jif -> Cif, Marathon -> Snickers and Opal Fruits -> Starburst (ironically all of them bringing their UK offer into line with other global territories, and, not the other way around as in the proposed Veterans -> Masters) have all resulted in a drop in popularity that required substantial marketing budget to overcome.

The reason for the paucity of examples is due to the fact that changes of name are rare, changes to the offer (and branding) are far more common and successful. A lesson that we should note. If you want to attract greater membership then you have to :
• Capture existing fencers who qualify but do not join the BVF
• Recruit non-fencers in the targeted age ranges to fencing.

Today in order to sell a product successfully you need to understand ‘the problem’ and then offer your ‘solution’, this offers fertile feeding grounds for Veteran Fencing and should be taken advantage of.

Congratulations needs to be given to Carl and the Team for the revamp of the website and recognition of both the consideration and the hard work that has already been invested, and the results should give the membership considerable comfort.

I think it makes far more sense for us to discuss, disagree and be passionate about the changes that all of us agree need to take place until we have built a consensus, rather than waste the energy on a name change which is probably a bit premature.

I submit that until we understand what the new offer is, we cannot really judge whether a name change is going to be beneficial (and if so to what etc..). Carl and the Team are doing really good work and we need them to address the package before we start expending energy arguing about the name.

PLS-F and Richardn like this post

avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-06-11
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:31 pm
I don't believe that sponsors would have given any more money if the word Veterans was not in our name. British Fencing isn't awash with sponsorship.

PLS-F and djmckay79@googlemail.com like this post

avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-06-12
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty NAME CHANGE

Fri Jul 30, 2021 2:11 pm
[quote="AM Steiner"]Having read through the various comments above, John Crouch's objection to the change of name as circulated by Carl Morris on 28/07/21, I'd like to make the following additional comments.

1 - Is there any objective evidence to support the assertions that the term "Veteran" is off-putting to younger old fencers, and that the term "Masters" would be less off-putting? I have not been able to identify any in the discussion document. This seems odd to me, given that this assumption is presented as the primary rationale for the proposed change. With numerous objections to the change having been raised, it would be a shame if it turned out that the main point in its favour turned out to have been false, and based only on supposition.

2 - The discussion document states that changing to "Masters" is part of a drive to modernise BVF, or "look to the future", which includes a "totally overhauled" constitution. Yet in the forum discussion above, a senior member has indicated that online and postal voting remain unconstitutional. I struggle to reconcile these two statements. If engaging younger fencers is a genuine concern of BVF, surely enabling online participation ought to be a significantly higher priority than any potential rebranding? In-person voting by a show of hands (a practice more commonly associated with the 19th century chartered incorporations than contemporary sporting bodies) provides a significant obstacle to participation in governance for members in their 40s and 50s who are unlikely to be retired and are likely have young children to look after. I would suggest that a "not welcome here" sign pointed at the digital generation is significantly more off-putting for younger members than an issues around the current brand.

3 - Why has a response to Mr Crouch's objection been circulated? And why is it anonymous? And why is it a rebuttal? The committee has made a reasonable case both for and against the change in the discussion document. It is now up to the voting members to decide. This unattributed and unnecessary repetition of the arguments in favour (but absent those against) reinforces the impression that the committee is seeking to impose change, rather than making a humble suggestion with respect for the greater wisdom of the wider membership.

Apologies for late response here Adam. I wasn't ignoring your questions replied a couple of days ago but it didn't send. Technology and I dont always see eye to eye. Anyway this was it. -

Thanks for your post Adam. Obviously you are dead against the change and that's fine we are happy to hear all opinions.

Just for clarity we are not making a humble suggestion. We are actively advocating a change and will endeavour to put those arguments forward as best we can. However we don't want people going along to the next EGM or AGM not being fully conversant with both sided of the argument. This is why the original document listed the disadvantages as well as the advantages. There will be people strongly for and people strongly against and both views are valid.  But the result will be decided democratically by the membership not the committee. Well perhaps not quite democratically as a two thirds majority will be needed but that is constitutional and we are abiding by that.

Anyway I will try and answer most of your points as best I can.

1) You are quite correct that we have not recently obtained objective evidence from younger fencers  agreeing to join up simply if we changed the name. However over the years many fencers have stated that the name is not only confusing but rather pejorative. I personally know fencers who have refused to join in their 40's as they didn't want to be called veterans. I totally understand that this is purely personal and many people have no problem at all with veterans. It may be that as many people will be put off by the name masters as who will be attracted. But we don't believe that this will be the case and one of the reasons we don't believe this, apart from the sizeable majority of our own fencers being in favour of it at the last physical AGM, is the number of sports that now have Masters categories. True the established sports like Snooker, Golf and Tennis don't. Probably because they can't. Their Master's tournaments are traditionally for their elite and there are TV deals involved with the name. But almost all other sports now use Masters. There must be a reason for this and if this has now become an accepted term for 'older' competitors why not go along with the terminology?


2) With regard to your comment - "A senior member has indicated that online and postal voting remain unconstitutional", what they meant by that was at the moment the Constitution says that people have to be 'present'. But last year the whole AGM, including voting, was conducted via zoom.  Granted this was driven by the pandemic but the satisfaction ratings for that seemed quite high. This doesn't mean that we aren't open to postal voting etc. in the future, but for now Zoom seemed to work, it was more democratic and it's our intention at the moment to continue with this.

3) John asked me if we would circulate his objections and I agreed on the understanding that we would have the right to respond as he addressed some issues we hadn't. If it had been put on this forum we would still have responded. I was happy to agree with this in the hope that it might stimulate more discussion here. Hopefully it will. The response was penned mainly by me with input from other committee members.

Obviously we are on different sides of the argument here but I appreciate your views and thank you for posting. Hopefully it will stimulate more discussion and perhaps even throw up some aspects that we haven’t yet considered.
Best  Carl
avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-07-30
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Change of Name for BVF

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:36 pm
I strongly support the views submitted by John Crouch and those who see a change to "Masters" as retrograde. The name masters is elitist, but the name Veteran is not. I am an armed forces veteran of 4 active service tours. I can confirm that as the Secretary of the Aden Veterans Association for Gloucestershire, rank does not matter in our Branch. Similarly it should not matter in Veteran fencing. If we change the name to include the word "Masters", those who may or may not have fenced before the age of 40 are likely to feel that we are elitist.

djmckay79@googlemail.com and Richardn like this post

avatar
Posts : 4
Join date : 2021-06-11
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:51 am
Caryl Oliver wrote:Replying to Carl Morris:

Your statement in your post:
'Jus to be clear - No committee member or anyone, that I can see, who is supporting the name change has suggested this'

Statement from Luce - (a committee member) a few posts above:
'Postal and online voting is not constitutional, so cannot happen'

Would you like to re-clarify?

Take a look at the Constitution item 19. Constitutional changes can only be made at an AGM or EGM by a majority of more than two thirds of those present and voting.

avatar
Posts : 2
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:25 am
Replying to Carl Morris:

Your statement in your post:
'Jus to be clear - No committee member or anyone, that I can see, who is supporting the name change has suggested this'

Statement from Luce - (a committee member) a few posts above:
'Postal and online voting is not constitutional, so cannot happen'

Would you like to re-clarify?
avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:42 am
In response to Eddie's point, I feel it worth mentioning that the 2019 AGM Minutes record that David Sweeney encountered problems with the word "Veteran" when seeking sponsorship.
avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-06-12
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty NAME CHANGE

Thu Jul 29, 2021 6:46 pm
Apologies I sent my previous post before completing.

cont...

With regard to voting

We have proposed that the vote will take place at a zoom either EGM or AGM. We believe that this is more democratic as it opens it up to members who simply can't attend an AGM in person. However it has recently been suggested that this is unconstitutional as the existing constitution, and custom and practice, suggests physical AGMs are implied. We don't necessarily agree with this and will take legal advice before proceeding further but I just wanted to clarify the committee position on this. We would prefer wider voting participation.
avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Thu Jul 29, 2021 6:31 pm
Whenever I'm asked for my opinion on something something that might affect others I try and approach it objectively, and as yet nothing has convinced me either way based on the following:

Will a name change will make any difference to marketing veterans fencing? So far no objective evidence has been presented either way.  Does any know if other sporting bodies experienced an increase in membership numbers as a result that might at least provide for some form of starting point with this element of debate?  In the absence of evidence this cannot be quantified and I can’t make a decision on this point.

The terms being confused are: "Master" a singular title as distinct from "Masters" an age category for a group. Agreed, there are events with masters as the name to describe elite level performance, however the meaning in sport is not universally accepted because masters is also a term for a category of athletes across many more sports than the examples cited: Tennis, Golf and Snooker.  So I have considered expanding the range of sports a little further and as of today the BBC website (link Tokyo Olympics: Results - BBC Sport) has a list of sports with results from the Olympics.  I used this as a very simple starting point for comparison.  

A basic google search indicates “masters” as a distinct age category for the following sports: Badminton, Baseball/Softball, Boxing, Canoeing, Cycling, Diving, Football (link Masters Football, I found veterans +football returned results for army football), Gymnastics, Handball, Hockey, Judo, Rowing, Rugby, (I couldn't find skateboarding but found speed skating), surfing, table tennis, volleyball, waterpolo, weightlifting.  
Separately Modern Pentathlon (of which fencing is a discipline) uses the term masters as an age category and so does athletics.

I couldn't find sailing age group descriptors from the current BBC results list
Sports from the same list that use the term "Masters" to denote a level of skill as distinct from age included, archery, equestrian (I found eventing and dressage) and shooting
Sports from the same list that use the term “Veterans” to indicate an age category include, fencing, triathlon, also shooting and taekwondo
Sports from the same list that use Seniors for the older age groups include Tennis.

My initial observation from a limited list is more sports currently use the term ‘masters’ than ‘veteran’ or ‘seniors’ for older age groups.  To allow for a more informed decision perhaps it might be worth proponents of either argument compiling an extensive list of UK sports bodies that use the different terms and possibly consider why the respective terms are used.  I tried to establish patterns along the lines of: is participant less mobile (golf, snooker, shooting and equestrian events), or, is ‘master’ already the recognised rank/title (although to confound any pattern I saw Taekwondo has “veterans” categories but Judo has “masters”).

With ‘accepted meaning’ potentially in dispute, the words "Masters" and "Veterans" have been searched in the Oxford Dictionary of English, 3rd edition, Oxford University Press, 2010. The definitions are provided below.
"(Masters) [treated as sing.] (in some sports) a class for competitors over the usual age for the highest level of competition."
"Veteran  noun a person who has had long experience in a particular field: a veteran of two world wars  [as modifier] a veteran left-wing MP.  an ex-member of the armed forces: a Vietnam veteran. - ORIGIN early 16th cent. : from French vétéran or Latin veteranus, from vetus 'old'.
The two dictionary definitions are distinctly different.  One definition indicates it is masters that is the accepted meaning for an age category while the definition for "veteran" provided not one but two separate examples of the word suggesting the military.  This provides a reasonable indication confusion may be expected, but does not guarantee that it will.

So far I disagree that it would be out of step with the world based on the numbers, but agree it may be out of step with other fencing federations.  

I disagree with the concept it would be misrepresentation, that it somehow devalues coaches qualifications or falls foul of the trade descriptions act because it is not a title being conferred on individuals “Masters Fencing” is not the same as “Fencing Masters”

While it is possible there maybe confusion I agree it is likely to be trivial as it is clear from the homepage description “British Veterans Fencing promotes and supports fencing for people over 40 years old.” Keeping the existing name or changing it to masters is unlikely to change the description/purpose of the organisation.

I am unable to quantify how many people find it unflattering, and have seen no evidence in respect of how it would alter the way in which the organisation is marketed.  Perhaps the proponents of both arguments could try contacting other UK sports organisations who have changed from veterans to masters in the last 15-20 years, to at least provide us with some kind of reference point for any decision we might need to make.

If anything I am now more undecided than I was before.

luce, Carl Morris, Jon Dawkins and djmckay79@googlemail.com like this post

avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-06-12
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty NAME CHANGE

Thu Jul 29, 2021 6:29 pm
In response to part of Caryl's post

"It is outrageous to suggest that a vote structured to enable every paying member of the organisation to deliver their opinion is unconstitutional. It is entirely contrary to good and honest governance to create an election environment that has the effect of suppressing votes."

Jus to be clear - No committee member or anyone, that I can see, who is supporting the name change has suggested this.
avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-06-11
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Thu Jul 29, 2021 6:06 pm
The way to attract more fencers of whatever age is to hold well organised competitions.

Having a reputation for good referees, a good timetable and a good venue is far more important than the name of the governing body.

PLS-F, Jon Dawkins, McK and djmckay79@googlemail.com like this post

avatar
Posts : 3
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Thu Jul 29, 2021 6:03 pm
I thought the results of my research into sports that have changed from "Veterans" to "Masters" might be enlightening:
The World association of Veteran Athletes, founded in 1977, later changed its name to World Masters Athletics. The International Masters Games Association holds multi-sport World Masters Games every 4 years. According to Wikipedia these Games are "open to sports people of all abilities and most ages". The minimum age criteria depend on the sport.
I also checked with British Rowing; they changed their "Veterans" section to "Masters" about 10 years ago "following the trend to keep in step. It was thought that the term "veteran" was derogatory especially as you start at age 27. The new name has caught on...." but some of them, including the Chairman, still refer to themselves as "Vets".
avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:04 pm
I started fencing at 46 and am no Master. I am comfortably veteran. For me the key element in a rebrand exercise should be research and evidence. From what I have read, the proposal is not evidence based. If it could be demonstrated that calling ourselves a Masters organisation would achieve the stated objectives without risking the widely stated potential negatives ( which are also without evidence) we might have a position to discuss. At the moment all is supposition. I would suggest that before such a fundamental action as a rebrand is considered we secure better information. As a final point there are many actions that could be taken to positively improve membership that don’t require a name change. Actually, it wasn’t my final point, sorry. Since joining BVF and taking part in competitions in 2019/20 prior to COVID I have thoroughly enjoyed myself, being called Veteran was never a concern.

John Crouch, Jenny Morris, PLS-F, Jon Dawkins, David Bradley, TonyBH, Andy M and like this post

avatar
Posts : 1
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:14 pm
As some of this seems to be trying to gather views, I will add my tuppence worth. I had no problems when I was in my late 30s knowing I would seen be eligible for Veteran's fencing and joined very shortly after becoming 40. I also have no problems with the double meaning of veterans being about to be a military veteran and already a fencing veteran. I think there was a fair point raised that their might be a different option than Masters just as AgeUK did with a more radical on message name.
avatar
Posts : 2
Join date : 2021-07-29
View user profile

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Thu Jul 29, 2021 11:54 am
I have tried to stay out of this debate as I have other more pressing things to worry about at the moment but reading this forum has prompted me to make a few observations:

It is clear that BVF wants to make the change from Veterans to Masters - the tone of communication makes it clear that they are seeking validation and support for that view, not a vote from the membership in order to inform a decision. This is evidenced by the rapid response to any comment that prefers Veterans over Masters. This puts pressure on members to 'toe the line' and subliminally suppresses the voices of those less willing to speak loudly.

It is outrageous to suggest that a vote structured to enable every paying member of the organisation to deliver their opinion is unconstitutional. It is entirely contrary to good and honest governance to create an election environment that has the effect of suppressing votes.

There is little value in re-litigating the previous vote. First of all it is done and was deemed valid at the time. Second of all, there have been some tectonic cultural changes since that time that mean the same arguments and values need to be reviewed before they are trotted out again.

Membership organisations require a delicate balance of clear and transparent leadership combined with a senstivity to the needs and desires of its whole membership. While the membership confers the power to make many decisions on the elected committee, a decision as significant as a name change must be taken to all the members so that they can vote without pressure or repercussion.

John Crouch, Don Coe, PLS-F, Caryl Oliver, Daithi, David Bradley, TonyBH and like this post

Sponsored content

Proposed change of BVF name Empty Re: Proposed change of BVF name

Back to top
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum