Access to this Forum from June 2012 – please read

[Deleted User]

Richard,
I have always had respect for your views and admire the efforts you contribute to the “cause”
I am also a member and am very comfortable with a small part of my subsciption going toward fully inclusive information sharing.
This is our public face and I agree that this thread is not ideal – However, it does demonstrate that a majority of actual users also think this is the way forward.
We already have a system where spares and the Club magazine can only be accessed by members and I understand the reasoning in those cases.
The forum is our public face that will encourage new members with the promise of a warm welcome.
Regards
Steve

[Deleted User]

It might therefore be a good idea that, if the decision gets turned back, this thread is removed or archived.
Thus new visitors will not be bothered with this discussion and can enjoy the forum as ever.

Cheers, Erik

[Deleted User]

Hi again, I’m still not clear on the rationale

The committee states:

*The decision was primarily made with the purpose of protecting the Club’s intellectual property and goodwill.*

I,m not a lawyer but does this mean that if if a member posts some advice on the forum that then belongs to the club ❓

My understanding is that it belongs to the originator, if this being the case surely the member has the choice of posting in the club only area or the open forum area, or not at all. its his or her decision whether to post but I believe its still their intellectual property can anyone shed more light on this ❓

It also staTed that

“Many of the active users of this forum are already Club Members and so most should be unaffected by this change.”

The forum stats show that two thirds of active users are non members, maybe this has been overlooked so could the committee please look into this again

ps I also agree with the last two posts, this thread will not encourage any new memberships

regards Jonathan 😥

[dave bushell]

One has only to compare the number of topics and posts in the closed Members Forum and the open General Forum.
Members Closed Forum – Topics 72 Posts 227
General Open Forum – Topics 1686 Posts 6027

Just look what we would lose!

NUFF SAID!!!

Dave
Vice President, Librarian,
London and South East Secretary.

[Deleted User]

The stats do seem to suggest that most club members are more than happy to share information, and certainly thats been my experience to date with club members being friendly and very helpful 😀

regards Jonathan

[Deleted User]

This decision really surprises me, I’ve read the committees reasons for it and still think it very odd. I’d go along with the idea of the spares scheme being members only, but the forum? That would hardly encourage new members, I think. It sounds a little like those club stands you see at shows where the folk staffing it are safely behind trestle tables and avoiding conversation with the hoi-poloi, till they have signed up and done 25 yrs service!
I will join in with the chorus asking for the decision to be turned round.

[Deleted User]

The reason, set out by the chairman, for the decision to restrict use of the forum to members was :
“….primarily made with the purpose of protecting the Club’s intellectual property and goodwill”.

Perhaps if the chairman were to spell out the nature and extent of the intellectual property that the club owns, seeks to protect and is under threat by free access to this forum a more informed debate would ensue. The information currently available and that lack of any posts setting out the case in favour of a restriction leads most to conclude that the decision is primarily about protectionism and the reasons behind this desire have not been adequately explored and articulated. More information is needed.

Specifically chairman:
1.does the club hold copyright, patents, design rights or any other such property that it needs to protect ?
2.What effect or threat does the current rules for forum use have on any such rights?
If the committee came to an informed view on the subject there is a need to explain the issues.

The chairman’s post included “….the Club cannot continue to permit a substantial part of its output to be provided free-of-charge…”. This hints at the need to protect the YOWL. The primary function of the club, in terms of assets deployed , is magazine publishing. The rising costs of printing and distributing printed material must be a matter for great concern to the committee.
In my view there needs to be a debate on the wider issues of the threats facing the club and only then should prescriptive decisions be taken.

To the best of my knowledge protectionism has never worked in any instance.
rjv

[Deleted User]

Just to be sure that my contribution on another thread is not missed, I will copy it here. To be absolutely clear, my objectives have always been, and remain, to stimulate interest in the Scott Motorcycle with the hope that once stimulated, a person will progress to ownership. As the Scott is significantly different to other marques, there is naturally the fear of the unknown, especially when horror stories like ancient folklore still circulate about their reliability. It seems logical that the prospective owner will need reassuring that he is not embarking blindly on a course of action he might well come to regret. The solution that is available, is to make information openly available and with it the possibility of open exchange with existing owners. It is what I call, “The hand of friendship” I sincerely regret that I find myself in disagreement with the club management, as I do recommend membership to all.
In the following copied piece, I make mention that I have a presently dormant forum facility on my website that I would consider to reopen when the open access to this SOC forum is terminated. This is not to be in open opposition to the SOC, but I am aware that there are a significant percentage of our 600 newsletter subscribers, who are interested to learn more about Scotts, but are not yet owners. The process from interest to ownership can be quite lengthy and during this period, the ability to join discussions with owners who are SOC members on their forum, makes the objective to acquire a Scott so much more agreeable. I think you must consider that however hopeful the SOC might be as regards attracting new members, people are not very inclined to join until they actually buy a bike. It is this first step that is outside the influence of the club that I and my friends have sought to stimulate in the interest of Scott ownership and thus directly to promote membership of the SOC. If I reopen our forum, it will be a service to those of our newsletter subscribers who as yet do not own a Scott and wish to have access to a forum where questions can be asked and information gained.

Copy of earlier posting
The SOC management are elected by the members at the AGM to be on the management committee to represent the majority of the members. It is impossible to please everybody and so it is always hoped that more will agree than disagree with the management. There is quite a good principle that if you find you have a significant difference with a person, then it is better to avoid their company than to bring stress to a gathering. As regards the management, I was on it for a while and at one meeting, I told of my experience when acquiring a Scott and Joining the SOC. There was a dearth of information and a dearth of spares. I suggested that the club should look more outwards and hold out the hand of friendship by making information available. A prominent member of the management committee said NO, we must force them to join the club before we tell them anything or sell spares to them. I said, well in that case it would be better to raise the subs a bit and stock a better range of spares. No came the cry from another prominent member, folks will not renew! I said, but it is only the price of half a gallon of petrol. Definitely not was the retort. I have spent most of my life as an “Odd Man Out” and although I respected absolutely their right to their opinions, I felt that they were wrong. Richard Tann was perfectly correct when he told me that I was not a team player, but as my assessment as to what would portray a more encouraging prospect to a potential new member was profoundly at odds with the prevailing culture within the management committee, I did the only decent thing and withdrew from the management committee. I was now free to do as I thought best and did exactly as I had suggested. First a website with technical information, so that any aspiring Scott owner could understand a little of these unique machines and know that if he took the plunge and bought a bike, then technical information was available. Next I made any spares I could not buy readily. My first bike broke it’s crank in 1967 and I went to Tom Ward who showed me a waiting list of about 20 names of owners who were waiting for a second hand crank to become available and he would add my name to the bottom if I wished. He did warn me that if, after a considerable time, a crank became available, it was well likely to have cracks and its future life short. That is when I started making cranks. When my son Richard first made our website, it had an open forum facility, but as the SOC decided to have their own forum, then I closed our forum down. My philosophy was and remains, to spread the word outwards about Scotts to try and attract prospective owners to the marque by portraying a friendly, helpful and welcoming face. I realize that if a person can be encouraged to buy a Scott, then he will then join the SOC, with my full recommendation. With my great friend Steve Enticott we started our free Scott Newsletter and Steve went on to put Bill Jameson’s compilation “Technicalities” on line open access as Bill specifically wanted the information to be open access. I do realize that given the profound difference in philosophy of presentation of Scotts to the rest of the world between the SOC management and myself, that I am not the most popular member of the club, at least to the management. I can only hope that they will take the same view, that although they disagree with my philosophy, they accept my right to hold such views, just as I do in return. So the bottom line is that if the SOC forum is restricted to members only, then I will revive the Moss Engineering site forum for anyone who wishes. Our newsletter goes out to just short of 600 subscribers intended as an encouragement to buy a Scott. I have no idea how many subscribers are owners or SOC members. The objective is to fan the flames of interest in prospective owners in the wider world! Always look outwards not inwards. Roger

[Deleted User]

Hi Lewis! 😆 😀 8) Long time no speak Kimmo Sabe (Lone Ranger talk) Was playing in Aberdeen when I heard the news about the SOC Forum closing to non members. A Very retrograde step mate! And whats all this about the clubs assets re Scott lore? Intellectual property. Does the Club own the Book of the Scott? Does it have the wide ranging knowledge of prominent racing members and long term owners. Does it own this knowledge? Come off it Lewis. A decision of this importance is a matter for the AGM.!
You know this, I know this (as an ex-Editor of Yowl for 4 years) and every sensible VOTING member knows this. The web based Scott Newsletter which Roger Moss and I run has NO administative costs. We have a vibrant and EXPANDING membership. Why? Coz its FREE mate. This is the Ministry of the Bleeding Obvious (to quote Monty Python). Maybe you and the Commitee should look to your administative costs and react to modern technology and modern ways of communicating about Scotts
Regards from Aberdeen (Where its cold!) Ted 😆

[lewis onions]

I am always loathe to relapse to my professional guise when dealing with Club issues but I note from a number of postings that contributors to the forum are questioning what intellectual property the Club has and the extent to which that property will be protected by the adoption of a closed forum.

I was once privileged to receive a lengthy explanation of what comprises intellectual property from the then Mr Justice Jacobs who was subsequently appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal and was in charge of the Court of Appeal’s Intellectual Property List prior to his retirement in 2011. I apologise for name-dropping as well as “getting all legal”.

All organisations of any sort hold intellectual property. That intellectual property need not be trademarks, patents or other legal interests capable of registration. It need not be the names, logos, drawings or written records contributors have mentioned. Intellectual property extends beyond such tangible things, through other tangibles such as an organisation’s telephone numbers and even its addresses or its location, to the very intangible connections and relationships it uses in the continuation of its business, creative expressions, collective knowledge and business and occupational practices, systems and procedures. Anyone considering intellectual property in the round in this way will appreciate that an organisation’s intellectual property is likely to attach to its goodwill and indeed in my posting on 14 March the two properties were mentioned together.

Legalistic though this is, I hope that it goes a little further in explaining the Committee’s decision. What we are concerned with is the essence and well-being of the Club; without being dramatic about it, the very existence of the Club.

And that brings me to my second point. The members of the Committee act at all times in what they consider to be the best interests of the Club as a whole. At the risk of straying into the law again, that is what the members of the Committee are legally required to do.
The members pay subscriptions and contribute to the Club’s overheads. As a consequence the Committee are bound to act so as to maximise the benefits received by the paying members whilst attempting to minimise the costs that the Club and therefore the paying members suffer. To properly discharge their duties to the paying membership the Committee cannot permit the interests of those who are not members to interfere. In such circumstances a service offered free-of-charge to non-members such as the forum is bound to come under inspection.

The suggestions made by contributors to the forum as to the Committee’s motives and their competence also warrant some comment from me. In carrying out their duties for the benefit of the membership the Committee members give freely of their time and quite often contribute financially as well. None of us has any ulterior motive for what we do. We do not have businesses which service Scott owners or otherwise rely on their patronage. We do not moan or complain about our lot, nor are we Luddites, despite what the contributors to the forum might like you to believe.

Above all we are not inward-looking or insular. Any member who has read any of my contributions to Yowl will note that I continually ask for members’ feedback and declare my willingness to engage with members at any opportunity by telephone, email or whatever. The response has always been less than lukewarm to the extent that I have expressed almost desperation. The most recent example is the complete lack of any response via the forum to my request for assistance at Stafford Show.

As has been suggested by contributors, members should consider what it is that they want from the Club and therefore where the Club is headed. If you want the best out of the Club, if you are not satisfied with the way in which it is managed currently or perhaps if you simply have the altruistic spirit of the current members of the Committee, perhaps you should offer to offer to get involved. The alternatives campaigned by some contributors are nothing less than self-indulgent.

[Deleted User]

Hi Lewis,

Thank you for the elaborate explanation. And I know by experience what it is to be on a Committee. And that it is very hard do it right for all.

But, given the feedback posted in this forum thread by SOC members as well as non-SOC members, I still hope the Committee will give this decision some second thought. I do not doubt that the decision was made with the best interest of the club and its members in mind, but I am sure we all have made decisions in the past that turned out to be not as wise as we thought they would be when we took them…

Or perhaps make it a discussion point at the next AGM.

Cheers,
Erik

PS: Concerning your last lines… if I lived in the UK I would be more than willing to help out at Stafford or even be on the Committee. And come to the AGM to discuss these kinds of subjects. But being an overseas member this is kind of hard… For us from oversea, this forum is one of the most important ways of staying in touch with the Scott community!

[Wilfried]

@Richard Blackburn wrote:

Wilfried,

There is a critical difference between Scotts and D-Rads or any other more popular bikes. That is there is enough demand for companies to invest in parts supply of more popular machines.

Hi Richard
the D-Rad with its very few machines -compared with Scotts – on the road is very much the same as the Scott (not technical aso…!) But it is rare and the community is very small and “special”. No one is producing spares to make big profit. Profit is possible with BMW, Horex; NSU but not with D-Rad.

The spares scheme is a very unique system for me and I believe it is a good idea. I contributed to the spares scheme some years ago.

I thought it may accelerate the discussion here when posting some provocative thoughts. But it should be allowed to raise also controversary statements.

@Richard Blackburn wrote:

You are welcome to join, then you can table a motion for the AGM next month!

Your suggestion to join the club to table a motion to the AGM sounds fine, but living in Austria and beeing a non native speaker it makes no sense for me, sorry. Also some postings with very very fine english wording here are a challenge for me to interprete correctly as I am not able to read between the lines. It would be nice if my english would be as good as my german – we would have some fun. But as long as my english is better then your german I have to try hard.

As an overseas member – image what means overseas! It means the big majority of the world! – I always feel more like a passive consumer in a british club.

As I stated earlier I was a member of the SOC and my membership falls down somewhere in the past without terminating my membership actively. If the SOC would have a different administration of membership I would still be a member.

Sorry if my posting sounded unfair it was not my intention. If you keep the language problem in mind you may forgive me.

Kind regards

Wilfried

[Wilfried]

@Erik wrote:

It might therefore be a good idea that, if the decision gets turned back, this thread is removed or archived.
Thus new visitors will not be bothered with this discussion and can enjoy the forum as ever.

Cheers, Erik

Hi Erik,

I believe it may be better to leave this discussion as it is and readable to all future members/nonmembers/Scott owners/pirates/vikings/mountaineers….

It shows a democratic culture open for all and this makes a much better impression than any!!! closed sections “for members only”!

Kind regards

Wilfried

[Deleted User]

Re Wilfried ‘s and other comments.

I was under the impression that Overseas Members of the SOC could vote at AGM’s via email? Correct me if I am wrong (being by nature a very self effacing person!!!!!!!!!) With regards to further discussion about the Management Committee decision I feel that as an ex -member of the SOC and intermittent poster that this discussion should continue in public as it directly affects us 1600 topic posters. For what its worth, my personal experience in national politics is that “The Oxygen of Publicity” resolves most things and makes accountable democratically decided decisions.
Cheers Guys and Gals!!!!! Ted

[Deleted User]

Being a committee member is a thankless task, you can’t please all the people all of the time. I believe that every one this forum and or Club member wants the Club and the marque to prosper and go forward. The committee should be congratulated on all the hard work it puts in and forum members should refrain from personal remarks. Being a relatively new technology a forum’s use may not be fully appreciated, I believe a forum has the power to unite a global community of Scott owners ( as is the case) and this can only be efficiently achieved by having it available and open to prospective club members for information exchange.

regards Jonathan

[Author]

Posts