ALL MEMBERS ! Please fill out those proxy forms..!!

[ChampChump]

So if I dress up really smartly, like wot a proper pilot ought to, will you not talk to me? I need to know in advance, in order to plan my flying wardrobe....

[Chris Martyr]

So if I dress up really smartly, like wot a proper pilot ought to, will you not talk to me? I need to know in advance, in order to plan my flying wardrobe....

For goodness sake Nic . Pull yerself together . Turn up at the world famous Deanland International Fly-In 'inappropriately togged up' and you can bloody well walk to the VIP area.....

And besides , blazers & cravats are even less welcome than hi-viz tabards at this seriously grass-roots orientated venue .

Prat-Free Zones . [some people just don't get it do they... ..]

[ChampChump]

OK, that's the untorn jeans back in the wardrobe, then.

[Paul Catanach]

Thing is Chris, I’ve had an epiphany.

Those who go chasing shinies and gewgaws are the sort of people with whom we do not wish to associate. They can have their clique or claque and I wouldn’t be one of them for quids. I actually don’t care now which way the vote goes. Because......

There are aviators and there are poseurs. There are people who lie and cheat to gain what they think makes them important and there are those who ride along on their skirts in the hope of catching a flash of ankle, oblivious to the fact that the siren milking them for favours is having them on. We see them for what they are and no vote will change that. They will never be the real thing.

We fly for the pleasure of it, with or without an audience. They will never be satisfied and always exposed for the charlatans that they are. Pretending to follow in someone else’s footsteps just makes them second at best. Certainly nothing special, far from it.

Make no mistake. Being a true pilot, an aviator, is a special thing and we will all be judged by our peers. Having to fight and claw for an award that was never yours is the saddest, most pathetic thing to behold.

Especially if it was given to someone else a year ago!

[Paul Catanach]

OK, that's the untorn jeans back in the wardrobe, then.

You carry it off so much better, especially with your Jimmy Choo’s.

[Chris Martyr]

Those who go chasing shinies and gewgaws are the sort of people with whom we do not wish to associate. They can have their clique or claque and I wouldn’t be one of them for quids. I actually don’t care now which way the vote goes. Because......

There are aviators and there are poseurs. There are people who lie and cheat to gain what they think makes them important and there are those who ride along on their skirts in the hope of catching a flash of ankle, oblivious to the fact that the siren milking them for favours is having them on. We see them for what they are and no vote will change that. They will never be the real thing.

We fly for the pleasure of it, with or without an audience. They will never be satisfied and always exposed for the charlatans that they are. Pretending to follow in someone else’s footsteps just makes them second at best. Certainly nothing special, far from it.

Make no mistake. Being a true pilot, an aviator, is a special thing and we will all be judged by our peers. Having to fight and claw for an award that was never yours is the saddest, most pathetic thing to behold.

Especially if it was given to someone else a year ago!

^^^^LIKE^^^^LIKE^^^LIKE^^^^LIKE
One thing I do agree with 'you know who' about though : I always fly with an engineer on board too !

Oh,,,,and another thing I also carry...................... A conscience !

[samrutherford]

The full email (at his request) is on the Pprune thread, but Ewald wrote to me:

Yes, TC had reopened the discussion about the motion on recommendation of the current LAA board!

Is that the case? That the LAA board recommended Tracey reopen this discussion?

[Brian Hope]

The importance of appreciating our diversity.

Those who go chasing shinies and gewgaws are the sort of people with whom we do not wish to associate. They can have their clique or claque and I wouldn’t be one of them for quids.

I have to say I am disappointed by the attitudes being expressed in this thread. One of this Association’s strengths is its support of the diverse types of aircraft and people who make up its membership. Whether you fly a FRED or a Falco, the LAA is here to offer support and guidance and I for one hope that situation never changes.
We have many members who have invested a great deal of time, effort and skill in building or restoring their aircraft, why shouldn’t they have their labours judged by their peers at the annual Rally? I have been very fortunate to have met many trophy winners over the years and what always impresses is their total commitment to our association and their modesty for the superb artistry they have created.
Making snap judgements on all and sundry just because they choose to fly something different to you, wish to express themselves via superb workmanship or have the good fortune to be able to invest more of their hard-earned cash in the latest kits and technology, adds nothing to the debate this thread is about. In fact it alienates many people who agree with the tenet that one's good character and scruples are what they should be judged on.

[Paul Catanach]

Brian, I had hoped it was obvious what I was referring to but in case it needs saying I wasn’t talking about the members you describe.

I even know one of them and he’s not as odd as he looks.

[dmcnicholl]

A lot of people unhappy with this going to vote with talk of leaving the LAA, perhaps a more effective protest would be to propose a vote of no confidence in the VP!

I alluded to such a thing on page 2 of this thread but it is and was too late to table such a motion in time for this year's AGM. I do agree that the VP's actions, and any other board member involved in resurrecting this matter are worth inspection.

However, like Brian Hope I am a little disappointed at the turn of recent posts particularly from people I ordinarily have time for on aviation forums. I can only attribute these to frustration that we don't have the background to the motion that we would like. For the sake of the LAA I hope the impending magazine mailing will provide that background.

I have no doubt that the Bird-in-a-Biplane had a great time flying through Africa on a journey most of us might envy but whatever we might think of T C-T and her influential chums this matter should be settled on the merits of the motion but absent the wording of the motion we cannot yet do that. Perhaps it revolves on semantics. Perhaps Team Tracey, acknowledging their use of modern electronic aids want to hark back to earlier times when navigation just meant to travel but then that would hardly be worth a mention let alone an award.

[Brian Hope]

Whilst I do not doubt you are referring to a particular person Paul, posting comments in such a broad brush manner can very easily be seen as implying criticism of those who certainly do not deserve it.

I do agree that the VP's actions, and any other board member involved in resurrecting this matter are worth inspection.

dm, the VP is not a Board member and the Board certainly had no desire for this issue to be resurrected.

[Planemike]

Just as a matter of interest, can any one recall the voting figures at the 2016 AGM relating to this matter?

[Brian Hope]

The votes of those present at the AGM were 17 for and 57 against the Motion. Proxy votes were 142 for and 8 against. That makes totals of 159 for the Motion and 65 against. 36 of the 'For' proxy votes were left to the discretion of the Chairman, who went with the majority. Not an unreasonable decision in my view.

[Marchettiman]

dm, the VP is not a Board member and the Board certainly had no desire for this issue to be resurrected.

In which case can someone please explain why Stewart Jackson holds himself out as both a Director and Vice President on his biog in the "Who we are" page of the Association's website? See
http://www.lightaircraftassociation.co. ... ckson.html

[Alan Kilbride]

Now Now fellers. Play nicely.
I'm sure Paul was a little tongue in cheek Brian. At least I saw it that way.
I am certainly this dissapointed that this motion is now on the agenda, but am concerned as most people should be that the magazine will show only one side of the argument. Please tell me this is not so.
I abstained at the last AGM, but won't now.
If only this would go away.........