Defamation

[silentC]

Yes I can see it now:

"The treasurer, finding it difficult to speak without removing his tongue from the president's backside, said ..."

[Wood Borer]

People join committees for different reasons. I am involved in a few but my reason is to get the show on the road and to contribute whereas a minority of others see it as an opportunity to exercise power and control. Possibly because of their inadequate anatomy or their otherwise boring lives.

Unfortunately these people discourage others from joining a comittee or a club which is a great shame because clubs can offer much more than the sum of the individuals.

Let's hope any clubs experiencing personality problems can resolve their problems swiftly so their members can get back to woodwork.

[Sturdee]

Let's hope any clubs experiencing personality problems can resolve their problems swiftly so their members can get back to woodwork.

I fully support that, clubs can quickly be torn apart by a few members to the detriment of all of them.


Peter.

[jackiew]

having been minute taker on a number of committees ( no I haven't got mug tattooed on my forhead but sometimes it feels like I must have ... why do they always pick on me !!!!) I generally make entries such as

" there was a heated conversation between X, Y, Z on the subject of whatever" and if I feel it appropriate, ( and frequently it isn't imho worth recording the ins and outs of the discussion), I often summarise the arguments without attributing the opinions to anyone.

So for instance if there were a discussion of whether J not present at the meeting would make a good coach or not I would not record that the President thought that he or she couldn't coach his way out of a paper bag, I would record however that there was a discussion of who to approach for as coach and that the name of J was put forwards for consideration.

Anyone should be able to challenge the minutes of the previous meeting at the next committee meeting and if you feel strongly that something is incorrect then you should do so. Even if the committee refuses to strike the item from the previous minutes they should record that there was a disagreement on the accuracy of the minutes. Its up to you whether you feel its worthwhile attempting to put the record right. I certainly wouldn't go down the legal path unless you're feeling very very flush with cash.

It could be worth searching out some guidelines for minute writing either in the library or the web and either passing them to the new minute taker for consideration or asking them to be discussed at a future committee meeting.

[Wood Borer]

Jackview,

If ever you want to volunteer for such a position, please let me know, your type are extremely difficult to find.

I know of such a position coming up in October 2005.

[ozwinner]

Jackview,

If ever you want to volunteer for such a position, please let me know, your type are extremely difficult to find.

I know of such a position coming up in October 2005.

Rob, she said she HASNT got mug tattooed on her head.

Al

[Wood Borer]

Perhaps Allana might want the job?

At least the meetings would be quick! Probably as short as her dress :eek:

600 seconds to holidays (I'm not counting)!

[Sturdee]

It could be worth searching out some guidelines for minute writing either in the library or the web and either passing them to the new minute taker for consideration or asking them to be discussed at a future committee meeting.

Agreed.

As minutes are there to record decisions made by the club ( or company ) I feel that often too much extraneous rubbish is put in the minutes, usually because the committee has not taken the trouble to find out what is legally required. That is what often causes problems with the members.

Having had on a number of occasion been required to submit company minutes in evidence to either a court or the ATO I have always advocated and insisted on the resolution approach rather than the chatty approach to minutes.


Thus my minutes would show :

Resolved that ( either after discussion or without discussion or unanimously or
after a vote being taken ) the club etc.....................

and

A motion was tabled that the club etc........................... After discussion ( if applicable ) a vote was taken and the motion was not carried.

Details of the discussion is irrevelant once the decision is made and so need not be recorded. The names of the proposer and seconder of a motion is also not recorded for once a decision is made it is the decision of the club as a whole and not the individuals who may not necessarily have agreed with the proposed motion. Often sub-committee members propose a motion from that sub-committee that they themselves may not agree with.

Taking the above approach makes keeping minutes easy and keeps you out of trouble and out of courts.


Peter.

[Bushmiller]

My brief, unsavoury and totally unsatisfactory brush with the laws of defamation echoes previously mentioned statements. That is, there are no real winners with the exception of the lawyers.

Some time back at the end of last century my dispute took me to a defamation lawyer specialist who had been recommended by a lawyer relative. The lawyer's company was retained by a daily newspaper for this purpose.

I commented to my relative later that I had been charged $250 for an hour consultation. She sheepishly said that was quite a good price! If you go to court (perish the thought) consider this. A friend only a year or two later was charged $800 for half a day by a junior (apprentice in any other trade) barrister who admitted he did not have any idea what the case was about. Full price; three grand plus per day.

The law is not for ordinary people. It is not affordable without having vast financial reserves or mortgaging your house.

At the end of the day in my instance I just conceded because I was going to

1. Cost myself a fortune.
2. Bring the institution I was criticising into disrepute and that was not my agenda.
3. Create misery for myself and family.

In conceding or just backing down, the perpertrators continue to get away with their misdemeanours, but most things in life are a compromise. The best solution is to resolve such disputes in private without recourse to third parties of any description.

Incidentally the specialist did mention that the laws of defamation were not clear cut. On the contrary their are quite vague and open to interpretation. The awards made can be crushing. Ask the writer, Bob Ellis. He lost a defamation case to Abbott and Costello,who are not the comedy act that some would have you believe, but senior ministers in the NSW Government.

I suspect the indistict guidelines suit the lawyers very well. I sometimes think I should have tried law (for the money), but I have trouble sleeping as it is.

Regards and Happy New Year

Paul

[ozwinner]

A friend of mine went to court recently, and he had some dude in a wig represent him.

All the wig wearer did was talk to the judge at the bench ( is that right?), and it cost my friend $6000, all for 1 hours work from the wig wearer.
And they recon brickies are expensive.

Al

[Bushmiller]

This issue reminded me of a story, but the current forum is a place for serious discussion, not frivolous comment.... Eh this may not be entirely true, but anyway I thought Woodies jokes might be a better place. So for those of you with nothing better to do on New year's Eve and the rest of you who visit this debate belatedly, you may like to visit Woodies Jokes - "Engineer in Hell" and see the story inspired by Peter R's thread.

Regards and Happy New Year

Paul

[AlexS]

having been minute taker on a number of committees ( no I haven't got mug tattooed on my forhead but sometimes it feels like I must have ... why do they always pick on me !!!!) .

Probably because you're a woman and therefore must be able to type

Or could it be because you are usually able to cut through the bs?
Thanks for your wise comments and humour through the year.

[outback]

As a wise old man seaid to me once in similar circumstances, "ya all carrin' on like bunch of school girls with torn panties."

Kind of puts in perspective I reckon.