Has it not occurred to Philip Wark that there is more than one way to get
involved, and that if people want to get involved via this list, then that
is perfectly valid, and he should not be attempting to close down channels
of communication. To suggest that anyone who doesn't sit on committees isn't
taking a stand on the future of CILIP shows an extraordinary level of
ignorance about what the membership are actually doing.
Diana Nutting
-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Wark [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 10 July 2006 12:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Closure of this list
I am the councillor representing the Community Services Group of CILIP and
was at council when the discussion and vote took place. I had no favoured
view on whether the list should be closed or not prior to the discussion.
Having listened to both sides of the argument and been given assurances that
the communities of practice would provide a suitable platform for
communication I voted to close the list.
Quite often Council votes against something I and CSG members/committee are
in favour of, such as the restructuring of special interest groups but we
have to accept that Council works as a democracy. The majority view wins -
not always the right choice but I have to accept it!
Having been on Council for a couple of years I can assure you that CILIP
staff work extremely hard to make the organisation work and to communicate
with members. Sometimes it gets it wrong - who doesn't make mistakes? CILIP
is a member organisation and if members don't like something they should get
involved and help to change it.
It is interesting that the closure of this list has caused such a furore -
let's hope members take an equal interest and make a stand on other
important issues - like the future of CILIP.
Philip Wark
Chair of CSG
Principal Librarian
Midlothian Libraries
2 Clerk Street
Loanhead
Midlothian EH20 9DR
Tel: 0131 271 3971
Fax: 0131 440 4635
-----Original Message-----
From: Frances Hendrix [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 07 July 2006 09:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Closure of this list
And comments made of a personal nature on the list by a member of
council not so long ago! So no hypocrisy please.
I wonder what % of council do use the list?
f
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of C.Oppenheim
Sent: 06 July 2006 15:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Closure of this list
I agree with Diana. If someone stands as, and is voted in as, a
Councillor, they have to accept the rough with the smooth. "Dummies" and
"gullible" is moderate compared to remarks made publicly about John
Prescott, but he seems big enough to cope with the criticisms.
Charles
Professor Charles Oppenheim
Department of Information Science
Loughborough University
Loughborough
Leics LE11 3TU
Tel 01509-223065
Fax 01509-223053
e mail [log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Nutting" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: Closure of this list
> So here's the nub of it. Those Councillors who voted to close the
list
> don't like criticism, so they close the list that criticises them.
Well,
> sorry, but if you put yourself forward for office, then you are
> accountable.
> If Councillors consider themselves above reproach, and treat the
members
> who
> elect them like children whose best interests they know, that perhaps
> goes
> a long way to explaining CILIP's problem.
>
> Diana Nutting
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Cook [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 06 July 2006 15:14
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Closure of this list
>
>
> Perhaps Councillors voted to close the list because they disapprove of
> some
> of the comments made on it.
>
> Referring to Councillors as "dummies" and "gullible" are not very
> professional and lend force to the argument for closing it.
>
> The Councillors are there because they have the interests of the
> profession
> at heart.
>
> As Karen Blakeman has already advised, there were good arguments put
> forward
> from both sides.
> It was then put to a vote.
>
> Democracy in action.
>
> Stephen Cook
> National Councillor.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Frances Hendrix
> Sent: 06 July 2006 14:54
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Closure of this list
>
>
> When you do, and you send out your manifesto, do mention this
>
> As an old age pensioner and list user I may join you!
> f
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Diana Nutting
> Sent: 06 July 2006 14:47
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Closure of this list
>
> I am getting more and more of the opinion that we need to elect
national
> councillors who are in tune with and are representative of the
> membership.
> So let's encourage and support the 11 who seem to know which way is
up,
> and when the time comes replace the 23 and the 7. It's the Council
that
> makes the decisions and the composition of the Council is in our own
> hands. And no, I've never stood for Council, but I might.
>
> Diana Nutting
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karen Blakeman [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 06 July 2006 14:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Closure of this list
>
>
> Hi All
>
> Just caught up with this discussion re the closure of LIS-CILIP.
>
> This was agenda item number 3 at Council. Chris Armstrong's paper on
why
> LIS-CILIP should be retained and Jill Martin's paper on the
Communities
> of Practice were both discussed in detail by councillors. The essence
of
> Chris's paper has already been circulated via this list.
>
> I am not going to attempt to summarise the discussion but I felt that
> all the arguments for keeping the list were well presented.
>
> The motion on which we voted was to retain LIS-CILIP alongside the
> communities of practice. The votes were as follows:
>
> For: 11
> Against: 23
> Abstentions: 7
>
> For the record, I voted to keep LIS-CILIP.
>
> I recall that it was also agreed that LIS-CILIP should remain until it
> can be demonstrated that the Communities of Practice have at least the
> same number of members and level of participation as LIS-CILIP.
>
> Karen
>
>
> --
> Karen Blakeman, UKeiG Management Committee
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> t: +44 118 947 2256 f: +44 20 8020 0253 m: +44 7764 936733
> 88 Star Road, Caversham, Berkshire, RG4 5BE
>
>
> This message has been scanned for viruses at Business Link for London.
>
>
> ============
>
> http://www.businesslink4london.com
> Winner: Most effective public sector website 2004
>
> ============
>
> This email and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees
> and are confidential. If you have received this email in error,
please
> delete it and immediately notify [log in to unmask] You are not
> permitted to disclose the content of this email or attachments unless
> specifically authorised by the sender to do so. Any views expressed
in
> this email are those of the individual sender.
>
> Business Link for London is a company limited by guarantee registered
in
> England and Wales under registration number 4110283. The registered
> office is situated at:
>
> 3rd Floor Centre Point
> 103 New Oxford Street
> London
> WC1A 1DP
>
> Although Business Link for London has scanned this email for viruses,
it
> accepts no responsibility for viruses once this email has been
> transmitted.
>
>
>
>
>
> This message has been scanned for viruses by BlackSpider MailControl -
> www.blackspider.com
>
>
> This message has been scanned for viruses at Business Link for London.
>
==========================================================================
The information contained in this message may be confidential or legally
privileged and is intended for the addressee only.
If you have received this message in error or there are any problems please
notify the originator immediately.
If you are not the intended recipient you should not use, disclose,
distribute, copy, print, or rely on this e-mail.
==========================================================================
This message has been scanned for viruses at Business Link for London.
|