PDA

View Full Version : NSWCA membership numbers



PHAT
10-08-2005, 02:55 PM
What was the NSWCA membership for:

1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000 NSWCA membership was 17 down on 1999
2001
2002 had 375 members
2003 had 383 members
2004 there was reduction in subscriptions owing to fall in membership.

Trent Parker
10-08-2005, 03:25 PM
Apparently there was something done wrong in 2004

We are already above the numbers in 2005 than we had in 2004

auriga
10-08-2005, 05:31 PM
it's always puzzled me why there are 1100+ players listed as NSW on the ACF ratings
yet there are only 500 or so members in the NSWCA ($25 a year).
am i missing something obvious here?

PHAT
10-08-2005, 08:32 PM
it's always puzzled me why there are 1100+ players listed as NSW on the ACF ratings
yet there are only 500 or so members in the NSWCA ($25 a year).
am i missing something obvious here?

Yes. The NSWCA processes the ratable games FREE for 600 non-members. It then passes on those games to the ACF and PAYS the ACF to rate them. :wall:

Oscar, "You are now entering the TWILIGHT ZONE." [I hope you are old enought to remember that TV show. :lol:

Bill Gletsos
11-08-2005, 12:11 AM
Yes. The NSWCA processes the ratable games FREE for 600 non-members. It then passes on those games to the ACF and PAYS the ACF to rate them. :wall:Incorrect as usual.
For non NSWCA events the organiser of the event pays for the rating of the event. It is only fro NSWCA events where everyone is a member that the NSWCA pays the ACF admin fee.

antichrist
11-08-2005, 01:04 AM
Incorrect as usual.
For non NSWCA events the organiser of the event pays for the rating of the event. It is only fro NSWCA events where everyone is a member that the NSWCA pays the ACF admin fee.

Didn't Matt as organiser know that?

PHAT
11-08-2005, 03:41 PM
Incorrect as usual.
For non NSWCA events the organiser of the event pays for the rating of the event. It is only fro NSWCA events where everyone is a member that the NSWCA pays the ACF admin fee.

The state body pays the ACF the "administration fee" in every case The ACF does not accept the administration fee from , say, a club for rating its games. You have argued that point yourself on another thread.

The NSWCA provides the service of processing the games of non-members for a fee of exactly $0.00. This ties in with the problem that Oscar pointed out of 600+ missing members with an ACF rating.

Bill Gletsos
11-08-2005, 04:29 PM
The state body pays the ACF the "administration fee" in every case The ACF does not accept the administration fee from , say, a club for rating its games. You have argued that point yourself on another thread.Firstly dont try twisting my words and secondly that is not what you said.
You stated that the NSWCA pays the ACF to rate the games.

The NSWCA is collecting the fee on behalf of the ACF but it is the organiser of the event that is paying the ACF admin fee to have their games rated.

PHAT
11-08-2005, 05:32 PM
You stated that the NSWCA pays the ACF to rate the games.

Yes, and it is true. Just because the NSWCA then turns around and charges the clubs, does not mean that the ACF has not billed the NSCA and extracts the fee from the NSWCA.

Furthermore, you still have not made any comment on the fact that the NSWCA processes non-members games for rating, and is still charging them $0.00 for the service.

Bill Gletsos
11-08-2005, 05:43 PM
Yes, and it is true. Just because the NSWCA then turns around and charges the clubs, does not mean that the ACF has not billed the NSCA and extracts the fee from the NSWCA.Dont try and twist it. The NSWCA is simply collecting it.
The fact is it is the organiser/club that is paying the ACF admin fee. If they didnt pay the fee the event would not be rated.


Furthermore, you still have not made any comment on the fact that the NSWCA processes non-members games for rating, and is still charging them $0.00 for the service.That was addressed at the 2004 NSWCA AGM. There was no support for a state rating fee.

PHAT
11-08-2005, 08:45 PM
If they didnt pay the fee the event would not be rated.

Not true. Carrat sends the SP files to the ACF and the NSWCA has to try and extract the money from the club.


That was addressed at the 2004 NSWCA AGM. There was no support for a state rating fee.


Are you personally comfortable with the fact that 600+ non-member players have their games rated but are not contributing to NSWCA by way of a membership fee.

And by inference, are the other 40% of players, who do pay a NSWCA membership fee, comfortable with subsidising those who get the service for free. (Perhaps you will say you don't know, perhaps you don't care)

Bill Gletsos
11-08-2005, 11:10 PM
Not true. Carrat sends the SP files to the ACF and the NSWCA has to try and extract the money from the club.It is entirely accurate to say that The fact is it is the organiser/club that is paying the ACF admin fee.
If the NSWCA had reason not to trust the organisers then payment would be required before the event was processed. However the NSWCA trusts its organisers to pay the ACF admin fee if they submit an event for rating. that trust has been demonstrated in that over all the years the ACF admin fee has now been in effect only one organiser defaulted on paying the fee for a rapid event. The rating period was subsequently rerun with the event removed.

Are you personally comfortable with the fact that 600+ non-member players have their games rated but are not contributing to NSWCA by way of a membership fee.

And by inference, are the other 40% of players, who do pay a NSWCA membership fee, comfortable with subsidising those who get the service for free. (Perhaps you will say you don't know, perhaps you don't care)Your ability to do maths is still as poor as ever. In case you didnt notice you forgot about all the juniors who are on the current NSW active list.

By what has been said at recent NSWCA AGM's there has been no support from the members to introduce a state rating fee.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 04:34 PM
It is entirely accurate to say that The fact is it is the organiser/club that is paying the ACF admin fee. If the NSWCA had reason not to trust the organisers then payment would be required before the event was processed. However the NSWCA trusts its organisers to pay the ACF admin fee if they submit an event for rating. [/quote

Blah blah blah, and it is still true that the ACF bills the NSWCA then turns around and charges the clubs. So, the NSWCA pays the ACF.


[quote]Your ability to do maths is still as poor as ever. In case you didnt notice you forgot about all the juniors who are on the current NSW active list.
And your propensity to blame me for figures that I did not calculate is still in force. I quoted Oscar, so, take it up with him, not me.


By what has been said at recent NSWCA AGM's there has been no support from the members to introduce a state rating fee.

I ask you please to answer the question I asked yesterday: Are you personally comfortable with the fact that non-member players have their games rated but are not contributing to NSWCA by way of a membership fee.

Furthermore, are the members who do pay a NSWCA membership fee, but not at the AGM comfortable with subsidising those who get the service for gratis.

Perhaps you will say you don't know, perhaps you don't care. Actually I think you just don't care as much about it as much as you care about scrapping Paul Sike's newslatter. After all you found the time and energy to produce a questionaire to undermine the newsletter, BUT, you couldn't do the same to determine how the members feel about the spongers in the west.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 04:50 PM
Blah blah blah, and it is still true that the ACF bills the NSWCA then turns around and charges the clubs. So, the NSWCA pays the ACF.With the money recieved from the organiser.
Stop trying to imply that the organiser is not paying the ACF admin fee.

And your propensity to blame me for figures that I did not calculate is still in force. I quoted Oscar, so, take it up with him, not me.You chose to quote them to supprt your claim. the onus was thetrefore on you to ensure they were accurate.

I ask you please to answer the question I asked yesterday: Are you personally comfortable with the fact that non-member players have their games rated but are not contributing to NSWCA by way of a membership fee.My personal opinion is immaterial as there is no support for it either at the NSWCA AGM or witthin the NSWCA Council.


Furthermore, are the members who do pay a NSWCA membership fee, but not at the AGM comfortable with subsidising those who get the service for gratis.

Perhaps you will say you don't know, perhaps you don't care. Actually I think you just don't care as much about it as much as you care about scrapping Paul Sike's newslatter. After all you found the time and energy to produce a questionaire to undermine the newsletter, BUT, you couldn't do the same to determine how the members feel about the spongers in the west.
If we had wanted to kill the newsletter we would have. The Council has continued producing the newsletter after the feedback to the questionaire.

However it is fairly hypocritical for you to criticise anyone about a newsletter. In your roll as Publicity Officer last year you were asked at one of the very few Council meetings you attended to look at producing a newsletter. Of course like everything else that yet just another thing you never did.

pax
12-08-2005, 04:57 PM
I ask you please to answer the question I asked yesterday: Are you personally comfortable with the fact that non-member players have their games rated but are not contributing to NSWCA by way of a membership fee.


Matt, this doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The ACF provides the rating service, and (NSWCA) non-members pay for that service via the ACF admin fee (which is paid by the players, via the tournament organisers and the NSWCA to the ACF).



Furthermore, are the members who do pay a NSWCA membership fee, but not at the AGM comfortable with subsidising those who get the service for gratis.


They are not subsidising anybody, since the rating fee is paid by the tournament organisers, via the NSWCA to the ACF. Players who recieve services from the NSWCA (such as NSWCA tournaments, mailouts, newsletters) must be members of the NSWCA. Where is the problem exactly?

PHAT
12-08-2005, 08:43 PM
The ACF provides the rating service, and (NSWCA) non-members pay for that service via the ACF admin fee (which is paid by the players, via the tournament organisers and the NSWCA to the ACF).

All absolutely true, BUT ... (see below)


... since the rating fee is paid by the tournament organisers, via the NSWCA to the ACF. Players who recieve services from the NSWCA (such as NSWCA tournaments, mailouts, newsletters) must be members of the NSWCA. Where is the problem exactly?

All true, BUT ...

1. One service the members receive is that of the NSW ratings officer processes NSWCA tournament games.

2. Some proportion of the annual membership fee is for that service. That service has a value and members pays for it.

However,

3. Non-members in non-NSWCA tournaments have that same service, of their games being processed by the NSW ratings officer, given to them for exactly $0.00.

Therefore, the NSWCA is providing a valuable service, free to non-members. The non-members are sponging on the hard work of NSWCA officers, or we could say, members are subsidising non-members.

The NSWCA is a joke that is not funny.

pax
12-08-2005, 08:50 PM
1. One service the members receive is that of the NSW ratings officer processes NSWCA tournament games.

He doesn't process anything. All he does as far as I know is collect the data and pass it on to the ACF rating officer. The ACF officer does ALL the processing.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 09:03 PM
1. One service the members receive is that of the NSW ratings officer processes NSWCA tournament games.

2. Some proportion of the annual membership fee is for that service. That service has a value and members pays for it.

However,

3. Non-members in non-NSWCA tournaments have that same service, of their games being processed by the NSW ratings officer, given to them for exactly $0.00.

Therefore, the NSWCA is providing a valuable service, free to non-members. The non-members are sponging on the hard work of NSWCA officers, or we could say, members are subsidising non-members.As usual totally incorrect.

The NSWCA provides the processing of the events for rating by the ACF for NSWCA and non NSWCA members free of charge.

The organisers of non NSWCA events pay the ACF admin Fee (normally via the entry fee).

Players in NSWCA events (all members) pay the ACF admin fee from thier entry fees to the NSWCA event.

The NSWCA membership form simply assures members that All tournament games 15 mins or more per player organised by the NSWCA are included in the ACF rating system which is updated 4 times a year.

Members can therefore be totally confidant that all rapid and normal events they compete in organsied by the NSWCA will be rated.

The NSWCA is a joke that is not funny.The only joke that is not funny is you.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 09:09 PM
You chose to quote them to supprt your claim. the onus was thetrefore on you to ensure they were accurate.

YOU CHOSE TO RATE THE STGEORGE OPEN. THE ONUS WAS THEREFORE ON YOU TO ENSURE THAT THE DATA THEY GAVE YOU WERE ACCURATE. :owned:

(If you want to use "logic" inappropriately to debunk me, make sure you are not stepping on your own mines. :lol: )



My personal opinion is immaterial as there is no support for it either at the NSWCA AGM or witthin the NSWCA Council.

Since when is the President's opinion, immaterial?????

Even if it was "immaterial," I/we all want to know what you think of processing non-members tournament games for exactly $0.00. So, tell us, unless you secretly like the idea and don't have the ticker to tell us.



If we had wanted to kill the newsletter we would have.

You wanted to and tried to kill it off, BUT, your rigged survey backfired :rolleyes:



In your roll as Publicity Officer last year you were asked at one of the very few Council meetings you attended to look at producing a newsletter. Of course like everything else that yet just another thing you never did.

I was sacked - after which anyone would be disinclined to produce a newsletter which, as was shown later, would have been tried to be killed off by the President. :snooty:

PHAT
12-08-2005, 09:22 PM
As usual totally incorrect.

Exactly how is this statement incorrect:
1. One service the members receive is that of the NSW ratings officer processes NSWCA tournament games.

Exactly how is this statement incorrect:
2. Some proportion of the annual membership fee is for that service. That service has a value and members pays for it.

Exactly how is this statement incorrect:
3. Non-members in non-NSWCA tournaments have that same service, of their games being processed by the NSW ratings officer, given to them for exactly $0.00.

Exactly how is this statement incorrect:
The NSWCA provides the processing of the events for rating by the ACF for NSWCA and non NSWCA members free of charge.



The only joke that is not funny is you.

I have not insulted you personally - only by your your association with the NSWCA council. Please refain for insulting me - except by my association with the banned and damned.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 09:23 PM
YOU CHOSE TO RATE THE STGEORGE OPEN. THE ONUS WAS THEREFORE ON YOU TO ENSURE THAT THE DATA THEY GAVE YOU WERE ACCURATE. :owned:At the time the St. George Open was submitted for rating I believed the results to be accurate.

(If you want to use "logic" inappropriately to debunk me, make sure you stepping on your own mines. :lol:)The only one using inappropiate logic as usual is you.

Since when is the President's opinion, immaterial?????

Even if it was "immaterial," I/we all want to know what you think of processing non-members tournament games for exactly $0.00. So, tell us, unless you secretly like the idea and don't have the ticker to tell us.I have expressed my view on a State rating fee both at the AGM and on here numerous times.
I have no intention of repeating it.

You wanted to and tried to kill it off, BUT, your rigged survey backfired :rolleyes:Not at all. The Council just wanted to be sure that the members really wanted it even though there was a lot of Australian and NSW chess information readily available from other sources.

I was sacked - after which anyone would be disinclined to produce a newsletter which, as was shown later, would have been tried to be killed off by the President. :snooty:You were asked to look at producing a newsletter at the 29th January Council meeting.
You were removed from office at the 24th June 2004 Council meeting having failed to attend the Febreuary, April, May and June meetings never once having apologised prior to or after the meeting.
That gave you 5 months to do something about a newsletter but like your total time on Council you did absolutely nothing.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 09:31 PM
He doesn't process anything. All he does as far as I know is collect the data and pass it on to the ACF rating officer. The ACF officer does ALL the processing.

Carrot goes through a hundred SP files and looks for the miriad mistakes that they carry, which if not found, wreck the ratings. The main mistake is mispelt names, which become new active players in their own right. This service is a must. Also, it takes NSWCA effort also to collect money money from non-member events and then use that money to pay the ACF the administration fee.

The ACF processes the labour intensive "cleaned up" SP files.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 09:33 PM
Exactly how is this statement incorrect:
1. One service the members receive is that of the NSW ratings officer processes NSWCA tournament games.

Exactly how is this statement incorrect:
2. Some proportion of the annual membership fee is for that service. That service has a value and members pays for it.

Exactly how is this statement incorrect:
3. Non-members in non-NSWCA tournaments have that same service, of their games being processed by the NSW ratings officer, given to them for exactly $0.00.

Exactly how is this statement incorrect:
The NSWCA provides the processing of the events for rating by the ACF for NSWCA and non NSWCA members free of charge.Post #18 explains why.

Your failure to comprehend is not my problem.

I have not insulted you personally - only by your your association with the NSWCA council. Please refain for insulting me - except by my association with the banned and damned.If you insult me via my association with the NSWCA Council then you can expect a response. Since you have no association with anything that the response can be directed at then the response can only be directed at you.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 09:46 PM
You really have no clue and as such you should not spout off on things you know nothing about.


Carrot goes through a hundred SP files and looks for the miriad mistakes that they carry, which if not found, wreck the ratings. The main mistake is mispelt names, which become new active players in their own right. This service is a must.As usual you have no clue what Steve does.
He doesnt check for incorrect names or check for any myriad of mistakes.

All Steve does is add new players and where SP files are submitted without id numbers, adds in id numbers. The files without id numbers is however few and far between as the vast majority of SP files submitted are imported directly from the SP master file on the ACF web site.
That isnt to say he does not discover some errors but it is the ACF rating system run by the ACF Ratings Officers that does the vast majority of data checking.

Also, it takes NSWCA effort also to collect money money from non-member events and then use that money to pay the ACF the administration fee.Again incorrect. Norm in his capacity as ACF Treasurer not NSWCA Treasurer bills the NSW organisers directly.

The ACF processes the labour intensive "cleaned up" SP files.As usual you have no clue what is processed by state rating Officers and the ACf ratings Officer.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 09:53 PM
He doesn't process anything. All he does as far as I know is collect the data and pass it on to the ACF rating officer. The ACF officer does ALL the processing.Actually he does some processing.
He allocates id numbers to new players for addition to the ACF master file and ensures that all players in the SP files have players id's allocated.
With virtually all organisers importing players directly from the SP ACF master files posted to the ACF web site, there is very little problems created that way.

Where problems occur is when events that were not run on SP are manually entered by the organiser into SP after the event and submitted to Steve for rating. The validity of results is not checked by steve e.g. does a player appear twice in the same round of an event, do all games listed in a round have a result coded against them. These along with many other things are checked by the ACF rating system and not the State Ratings Officers.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 10:14 PM
I have expressed my view on a State rating fee both at the AGM and on here numerous times.
I have no intention of repeating it.

Then I will state it for you


NSW has no need for a state rating fee covering every event in NSW.

I believe there is a need for a state rating fee for non NSWCA events on top of the ACF admin fee, however since this would also affect NSWCA members then perhaps a slight reduction in NSWCA would need to be considered.

Of course you could just impose said fee without any reduction in membership fee but I'm not sure thats desirable.

I would envisage a NSW state rating fee for non NSWCA events as being the same as the ACF admin fee.





You were asked to look at producing a newsletter at the 29th January Council meeting.
You were removed from office at the 24th June 2004 Council meeting ... There is no better way to not get a job done than to sack the worker.

BTW, why didn't you ever ring me up and say "Dude, you are in danger of being sacked if you don't show at the next meeting."

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 10:29 PM
There is no better way to not get a job done than to sack the worker.What worker. You did nothing. You had 5 months to do something about the newsletter.

BTW, why didn't you ever ring me up and say "Dude, you are in danger of being sacked if you don't show at the next meeting."You should accept responsability for your own inactions. It is not my responability to remind you to attend meetings.
You had shown no interest in doing anything and in fact you did nothing.
You showed no interest at all for many months.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 10:32 PM
You really have no clue and as such you should not spout off on things you know nothing about.

As usual you have no clue what Steve does.
He doesnt check for incorrect names or check for any myriad of mistakes.

All Steve does is add new players and where SP files are submitted without id numbers, adds in id numbers. The files without id numbers is however few and far between as the vast majority of SP files submitted are imported directly from the SP master file on the ACF web site.
That isnt to say he does not discover some errors but it is the ACF rating system run by the ACF Ratings Officers that does the vast majority of data checking.


Kill me. I am not worthy of life. I said Carrot does this that and the other. You say he does something, another and more. BIG DEAL, not. The details are not the issue, they are your red herring. The issue is that Carrot slaves away doing "stuff" on SP files for non-paying non-members.



Again incorrect. Norm in his capacity as ACF Treasurer not NSWCA Treasurer bills the NSW organisers directly.


Hmmm, that is interesting. Does he also bill Victorian organisers directly, or is this a special deal for NSW organisers?

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 10:38 PM
Kill me. I am not worthy of life. I said Carrot does this that and the other. You say he does something, another and more. BIG DEAL, not. The details are not the issue, they are your red herring.The details are the issue. As usual you made statements as though they were fact about which you knew nothing which were incorrect.

The issue is that Carrot slaves away doing "stuff" on SP files for non-paying non-members.No part of the NSWCA membership fee goes towards the State Rating Offcier carrying out his function. As such any processing he does of SP files is done for the same cost for NSWCA and non NSWCA members, zero.

Hmmm, that is interesting. Does he also bill Victorian organisers directly, or is this a special deal for NSW organisers?Just NSW since in his capacity of NSW Treasurer he knows who to bill directly for the events.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 10:39 PM
You should accept responsability for your own inactions.


Is it not the Presidents responsability to monitor and guide the councillors (in)actions?


It is not my responability to remind you to attend meetings.


Again, is it not the Presidents responsability to monitor and guide the councillors (in)actions?



What exactly is a President supposed to do?

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 10:50 PM
Is it not the Presidents responsability to monitor and guide the councillors (in)actions?

Again, is it not the Presidents responsability to monitor and guide the councillors (in)actions?There were no actions on your part to guide. You demonstrated you had no interest in doing anything.

As an adult you need to accept responsability for you own actions. Your actions were to actually do nothing.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 10:53 PM
No part of the NSWCA membership fee goes towards the State Rating Offcier carrying out his function.


:lol: :lol: What a ludicrase argument. The membership fee is for NSWCA services. The ratings processing is one of those services. :lol: :lol:



As such any processing he does of SP files is done for the same cost for NSWCA and non NSWCA members, zero.

:lol: :lol: Yep, I am still laughing because, the membership fee is for NSWCA services. The ratings processing is one of those services. So, members pay and non-members do not.


Just NSW since in his capacity of NSW Treasurer he knows who to bill directly for the events.

That is interesting. The ACF is doing sweet heart deals for NSW re the collection of the Administration fee. I am sure the other state bodies would also like that deal.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 11:00 PM
There were no actions on your part to guide.

Regardless of my faiings, this is pure abdication of Presidential responsability. writ large.

Guide, mentor, monitor, facilitate, communicate .......

What is the feeling the appearence of this incomplete list stirs in you?

PHAT
12-08-2005, 11:03 PM
I believe there is a need for a state rating fee for non NSWCA events on top of the ACF admin fee

Why?

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 11:06 PM
:lol: :lol: What a ludicrase argument. The membership fee is for NSWCA services. The ratings processing is one of those services. :lol: :lol:

:lol: :lol: Yep, I am still laughing because, the membership fee is for NSWCA services. The ratings processing is one of those services. So, members pay and non-members do not.No part of the membership fee is allocated nor spent on the State Rating Officer processing the SP files for rating.

:That is interesting. The ACF is doing sweet heart deals for NSW re the collection of the Administration fee. I am sure the other state bodies would also like that deal.This only occurs because Norm is both the NSW and ACF Treasurer.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 11:07 PM
Why?I explained that at the AGM.
I will not be repeating myself.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 11:18 PM
Regardless of my faiings, this is pure abdication of Presidential responsability. writ large.

Guide, mentor, monitor, facilitate, communicate .......

What is the feeling the appearence of this incomplete list stirs in you?It wasnt like you did some things and were remiss in some others.
You did absolutely nothing whilst on Council.
You demonstrated to all what a complete waste you were as a council member.
You were asked on numerous occasions to do things and you did nothing.

For you to even suggest that you would have listened to me is laughable.

You showed no interest in doing what the Council asked you to do, so the chances that you would have listened to me was somewhere between none and Buckleys.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 11:29 PM
I believe there is a need for a state rating fee for non NSWCA events on top of the ACF admin fee

Why?


I explained that at the AGM.
I will not be repeating myself.

Not everyone was at the AGM. So, tell them now.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2005, 11:31 PM
Not everyone was at the AGM. So, tell them now.I believe I have stated it on the BB previously and I wont be repeating myself.

PHAT
12-08-2005, 11:32 PM
... the chances that you would have listened to me was somewhere between none and Buckleys.

Guide, mentor, monitor, facilitate, communicate .......

If you can't do the job what more needs to be said. :rolleyes:

PHAT
12-08-2005, 11:49 PM
I believe I have stated it on the BB previously and I wont be repeating myself.

Was it:


Its just the implementation of a state ratings fee is not easy.

or


From a financial viewpoint NSW has no need to charge a state rating fee, however to charge a non members rating fee is too difficult to administer

or


In fact what you would want to charge is a non member rating fee. This however is too difficult to administer and adds unnecessary work to the state ratings officer.
Therefore a state rating fee for non NSWCA events would be the easiest to administer.

But that doesn't happen !!!

The council is allowing the non-members to sponge services off the NSWCA. Just admit it.

Bill Gletsos
13-08-2005, 12:35 AM
Was it:I have just under 6600 posts on this BB and over 1300 on the old ACF BB.
Your mission Mr Phelps if you choose to accept it is to feel free to search each and every one of them looking for it.
As always, should you or any of your IM force be caught or killed, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions. This tape will self-destruct in five seconds. Good luck, Jim. :whistle:

The council is allowing the non-members to sponge services off the NSWCA. Just admit it.What I will admit is that you havent a clue.

Trent Parker
14-08-2005, 11:27 PM
I have just under 6600 posts on this BB and over 1300 on the old ACF BB.
Your mission Mr Phelps if you choose to accept it is to feel free to search each and every one of them looking for it.
As always, should you or any of your IM force be caught or killed, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions. This tape will self-destruct in five seconds. Good luck, Jim. :whistle:

:lol: :clap:

After scanning a rubbish thread like this it is good to see some humorous stuff :D

Sweeney get lost will ya. I think the whole board is fed up with ya BS....

Garvinator
14-08-2005, 11:39 PM
Sweeney get lost will ya. I think the whole board is fed up with ya BS....
the whole board is a stretch, but i am sure it is the high majority of the board :uhoh:

Steve K
15-08-2005, 12:29 PM
There were no actions on your part to guide. You demonstrated you had no interest in doing anything.

As an adult you need to accept responsability for you own actions. Your actions were to actually do nothing.

I have been following this thread and others with great amusement. The vitriol is astonishing. If this were a tennis match I would have Gletsos leading 2 sets to none with Gletsos leading in the 3rd set at 5 games to none.

This post from Gletsos is like an ace straight down the line. Gletsos now has match point....several match points in fact.

PHAT
15-08-2005, 04:14 PM
I have been following this thread and others with great amusement. The vitriol is astonishing. If this were a tennis match I would have Gletsos leading 2 sets to none with Gletsos leading in the 3rd set at 5 games to none.

This post from Gletsos is like an ace straight down the line. Gletsos now has match point....several match points in fact.

:lol:

Steve, you may well be right about the score. However, you neglect the fact that I am not actually playing his game anymore. Some month ago, I said that "I would cut it out" - being I was not going to give him anymore personal stick. I think I have done no more since then than to wave a twig in his direction. However, Bill keeps smashing balls down the court to a bloke who has put his racket away. Rather one sided. I feel sorry that you paid good money at the booth, just to see an exhibition of something akin to a man kicking a tethered dog. But hey, what ever gets you off.

If you had seen had last three years games, you would understand why he cannot stop himself from flogging his nag in a one horse race.

PHAT
15-08-2005, 04:20 PM
Sweeney get lost will ya. I think the whole board is fed up with ya BS....

Have another drink on the house, then tell me about what constitutes a fair banning.

(Bull)shit Happens. ;)

Spiny Norman
15-08-2005, 07:02 PM
Some month ago, I said that "I would cut it out" - being I was not going to give him anymore personal stick. I think I have done no more since then than to wave a twig in his direction.
Indeed, to be fair to MS, he has indeed been very reserved (relatively speaking) in his postings since then. But can a dog change his spots? The jury may still be out on that one. Perhaps the lawyers amongst us could advise: Is it true that the longer the jury is out the less likely they are to eventually come back with a guilty verdict? Can MS stay the course? Stay tuned for the next exciting episode (if there is a next episode, which there may not).

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2005, 07:21 PM
Some month ago, I said that "I would cut it out" - being I was not going to give him anymore personal stick. I think I have done no more since then than to wave a twig in his direction.I have cut out calling you names.

You have however made misrepresenative/inaccurate statements about the NSWCA.

You would apparently like to essentially be allowed to make such statements about the NSWCA and not be held accountable.

I will continue to direct statements at you when you make statements that are incorrect and/or misrepresentative about the NSWCA.

PHAT
15-08-2005, 08:29 PM
I will continue to direct statements at you when you make statements that are incorrect and/or misrepresentative about the NSWCA.

It is called ad hominae - appealing to personal rather than to logic or reason.