Criticism / Support


In July 2003, allegedly a "number" of web site visitors (who haven't got the guts to identify themselves, preferring to remain anonymous) took it upon themselves to place a series of postings on the 289 Register Discussion Forum containing abusive criticism of my efforts at running the 289 Register Web Site and Newsletter.

I understand that Internet forums and such like open up a new world of opportunities for those people out there that have been rejected by the real world. Maybe they were ganged up against and picked on at school, bullied by their fathers, have a real problem sticking up for themselves in the workplace, have a problem finding like-minded people to make friends with, etc, etc. Being able to hide behind a computer screen and throw abuse at people they will never have to face in the real world on their own gives them a false sense of confidence, it lets them feel like the ‘big man’ for once and basically try to cover up the sad little person that they really are.
If that person needs to have a go at me to help them feel ‘part of the gang’ and complete the act, then that is fine by me. To be honest, I found the initial postings quite funny, and enjoyed taking the p*ss in some of my replies. However, when it escalated further until a number of inaccurate allegations were made about the rest of the committee members in a vain attempt to get that little edge over me, I decided that the situation was completely out of hand, so I removed these entries from the Forum and listed them all below instead.
Just as a reminder to all - I originally set up the Discussion Forum as a quick and efficient way for people (members and non-members alike) to exchange views and advice on topics relating to 289s (and not to throw abuse at anyone).

The real reason why the large "number" of posters all chose to remain anonymous was because almost all of the postings were from one and the same person, who used several different names in a feeble attempt to strengthen his personal argument against me. What this sad individual obviously didn't realise was that every time he "anonymously" posted an entry on the Forum, a record of his IP address and Host Provider details was added to the hidden log on the Parsimony Forum web site (which only I, as the web site administrator, can access).

Wait - what on earth is an IP Address?

Every time you log onto the internet, you are allocated an Internet Protocol Address (much like a postal address or telephone number) by your Host Provider. This unique IP address (there are over 4.3 billion possible combinations) is used to identify your PC amongst the millions of others all connected together on the world wide web. Some Internet Providers issue fixed IP addresses to their customers (particularly in larger company networks), others issue dynamic IP addresses - but even the dynamic addresses do not change significantly, since the provider will only have purchased and registered as few fixed addresses as they require (so the first two groups of numbers will always be the same from the same provider).
I have listed these details in the following table, and added this information to the individual Forum entries further below in dark green.

Entry Number "Name" Date IP & Host Address
1 Peter B 17 Jun 2003 22:11:34 81.77.224.21, user-21.bbd21tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
2 Peter 20 Jun 2003 13:00:07 81.77.224.21, user-21.bbd21tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
3 Peter B 26 Jun 2003 16:33:07 81.77.224.21, user-21.bbd21tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
4 Peter 27 Jun 2003 11:18:38 81.77.224.21, user-21.bbd21tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
5 Peter 30 Jun 2003 11:08:30 81.77.11.116, user-2932.tcl16.dsl.pol.co.uk
6 Peter. 01 Jul 2003 15:40:54 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk
7 John 01 Jul 2003 19:20:11 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk
8 Anon for personal reasons. 02 Jul 2003 09:25:07 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk
9 Peter. 04 Jul 2003 10:06:07 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk
10 Peter. 04 Jul 2003 14:06:38 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk
11 Peter 04 Jul 2003 18:43:30 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk
12 Pat (patmoorish@hotmail.com) 07 Jul 2003 10:32:00 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
13 Peter B 07 Jul 2003 21:40:00 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
14 Cobraman Clive 07 Jul 2003 16:36:14 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
15 Cobraman Clive 08 Jul 2003 09:03:30 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
16 Cobraman Clive 08 Jul 2003 13:33:40 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
17 John 08 Jul 2003 23:10:41 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
18 289joe 09 Jul 2003 13:56:06 62.188.4.50, 1Cust50.tnt14.lnd1.gbr.da.uu.net
19 Many members 10 Jul 2003 09:51:24 62.188.1.35, 1Cust35.tnt13.lnd1.gbr.da.uu.net
20 Many 10 Jul 2003 11:56:23 62.188.8.99, 1Cust99.tnt16.lnd1.gbr.da.uu.net
21 Pete 24 Jul 2003 15:39:04 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
22 Pete 25 Jul 2003 09:44:31 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
23 AWM 26 Jul 2003 12:11:56 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
24 AWM 26 Jul 2003 12:18:36 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
25 Pete 27 Jul 2003 11:54:06 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
26 Peter B 29 Jul 2003 09:28:34 81.77.169.228, user-484.bbd14tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk
27 Peter B 29 Jul 2003 13:41:49 81.77.169.228, user-484.bbd14tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk


If you compare the IP Addresses in the table above, you can clearly see that ....
entry numbers 1 to 4 ("Peter B" and "Peter") came from the same PC ....
entry numbers 6 to 11 ("Peter", "John" and "Anon for personal reasons") came from the same PC ....
entry numbers 12 to 17 ("Pat Moore", "Peter B" "Cobraman Clive" and "John") came from the same PC ....
entry numbers 18 to 20 ("289joe" and "Many members") came from the same PC ....
entry numbers 21 to 25 ("Pete" and "AWM") came from the same PC ....

Furthermore, the IP addresses in entry numbers 1 to 17 and 21 to 27 are all registered to Energis UK in Leeds, and the IP addresses in entry numbers 18 to 20 are all registered to UUNET-DAN-UK, between London and Cambridge.

This means that there were only two people posting all of these complaints - since "Peter B","Peter", "Pete", "John", "Anon for personal reasons", "Pat Moore", "Cobraman Clive" and "AWM" are all one and the same person, and "289joe" and "Many members" are one and the same. Hence these two individuals with multiple personality disorders were pretending to represent at least ten different people. You might like to take the time to re-read the messages originally entered on the Discussion Forum below (which I have colour-coded, dependant upon who sent them). Armed now with this knowledge, it puts a completely new light on the issue !!
You've both been rumbled, guys !!


Colour Code:
Incoming Support / Constructive Criticism
Incoming Responses from Poster Nr. 1 ("Peter B","Peter", "Pete", "John", "Anon for personal reasons", "Pat Moore", "Cobraman Clive" and "AWM")
Incoming Responses from Poster Nr. 2 ("289joe" and "Many members")
Incoming Responses from Poster Nr. 3 ("Brian")
My Outgoing Replies
My Comments


Written by Peter B at 17 Jun 2003 22:11:34: ( 81.77.224.21, user-21.bbd21tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

It's about time this web site lost it's tacky content and silly intro sequences. It's the same crap into that bored people years ago. The silly mouse tails, silly buttons, silly bouncing text are pathetic.

Come on please site designer, let's have a proper professional looking site without all the silly stuff. This is where all those that are interested in 289's come and they are welcomed with silly boring intro's etc. The site is also very difficult to navigate as windows open without "back" buttons and the only way back to the previous page is to come out and start again and that means more silly intro, bouncing text, silly mouse trails, etc.

Come on, let's have some improvement here please. End the crap.


Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 17 Jun 2003 22:51:29: ( 80.133.98.199, p508562C7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

It's a great shame that you aren't prepared to identify yourself as anything more than Peter B. If you were a fully paid-up member of the 289 Register, I would listen to your many criticisms a little more seriously.

But since you can obviously do a much more professional job than I can (in my spare time), do I understand correctly that you are volunteering to take the web site over from me? Now who's full of it, eh?


Written by Carl Thompson (917carl@earthlink.net) at 04 Jul 2003 21:37:50: ( 4.43.233.207, lsanca1-ar15-4-43-233-207.lsanca1.elnk.dsl.genuity.net )

Its easy to crtisise somebody, I do not like it! This man puts his time in trying to maintain a site for all, It has been of GREAT help to me in my conquest of finding out about repica Cobras. If you don't like it maybe you should volinter your time and try to help.If you don't want to help then SHUT UP!

Carl Thompson


Written by Peter at 20 Jun 2003 13:00:07: ( 81.77.224.21, user-21.bbd21tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

Two things:

1. It matters not that you are unhappy with my ID. The fact is that the site is full of crap, bad navigation and poor design. OK, you do this in your spare time but if you spent less time on the "silly bits" you would have even more spare time!

2. Yes, no problem. If you want to off-load the site I would be happy to take it over. I'm sure many others would be as happy too. Maybe you should ask people's opinions on the site adn maybe also ask if anyone else wants to take it on.

This site, like I said in my original post, is probably the first stop for anyone interested in 289's. NOT JUST FULLY PAID UP MEMBERS!!! but anyone. The navigation system fails each time and the pathetic silly bits are very frustrating.

So come on David, let's have some professionalism here. You obviously have time to sit on the forum so how about a little time on the site? If you can't hack it then why not bow out gracefully and pass the job to someone with fresh blood.

Please, I'm not trying to offend it's just that many visitors (including many fully paid up members) mention the various problems in open conversation but obviously don't want to offend you by telling you their opinions.


Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 25 Jun 2003 23:51:47: ( 80.133.102.209, p508566D1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

Hi Peter B,

Before I hand over the 289 Register web site for you to run, could you please supply me with evidence of your superior web site design and alledged professionalism, so that I can then ask the 289 Register Members (whose membership fees pay most of the costs for this site) to vote?

Regards,

David Butcher


Written by Peter B at 26 Jun 2003 16:33:07: ( 81.77.224.21, user-21.bbd21tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

Don't be stupid. I would take the site over with pleasure but that was not my aim here. What I was trying to do was bring to your attention the fact that the site is full of silly moving things, bouncing text, poor navigation and other general crap. I was hoping that you would realise that the site is just so unprofessional. Instead you ask me to disclose my details! Well no.

Tell you what, why don't you ask the members what they think of the site. Allow them to remain annonymous though because people don't like to offend. Maybe a questionaire on the site? Perhaps then you will understand the memberships frustration at what you have done.

Carry on with the site but please lost the crap and make the navigation work.

If not how about openly admitting defeat and resigning from the task in which case the membership can then find someone new.

Just a little further point... you say the membership pays for the site. So when then is it called "David & Andrea Buchers web site" ... in silly bouncing text!!!!! Say no more!


Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 26 Jun 2003 23:40:59: ( 80.133.100.110, p508566D1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

Just as I thought, you seem to be full of even more shite than you think the 289 Register web site is ....

And since it seemed to escape your notice, I run four totally different web sites, one of which is the 289 Register web site. The "silly bouncing text" that you refer to links to my private web site, which has nothing to do (in content or financially) with the 289 Register web site, so you missed that boat completely.

I'm sorry if the navigation is too difficult for you to follow, I just hope (for your sake) that no-one ever covers your head with a paper bag - you'd never find your way out of that one either !!

Let's just see how many other people rush forward to take over the 289 Register web site and/or the Newsletter from me .... then I can get on with my life, rather than wasting my time replying to your anonymous criticisms ;-))

Regards,

David Butcher


Written by Peter at 27 Jun 2003 11:18:38: ( 81.77.224.21, user-21.bbd21tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

The bottom line David is that the site is crap, unfprofssional and boring.

So you can carry on with your blatant ignorance or, as I suggested, ask around for peoples opinions.

You're full of your own self importance.


Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 28 Jun 2003 15:23:47: ( 80.133.101.92, p508566D1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

Hi Peter,

As a special favour to an especially sad git who repeatedly wastes his time visiting such a "crap, unfprofssional and boring" site (instead of creating his own site, with a professional design and interesting content), I have removed the 289 Register characters that followed the cursor around on the home page, and the "cold outside" welcome introduction. No doubt this will still not meet with your approval, but maybe because I'm so "full of my own self importance", I simply don't give a shite what you think.

At least I hope that our above correspondance will provide some entertainment for future Forum visitors, and may even spark off some more constructive criticism than you were capable of suggesting ....

Regards,

David Butcher.


Written by Peter at 30 Jun 2003 11:08:30: ( 81.77.11.116, user-2932.tcl16.dsl.pol.co.uk )

Well done! Seriously, well done. That "cold outside" intro was certainly long overdue for a disappearance and the mouse trails were rather old hat too. You do need to check your server though as the intro is still there!


Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 02 Jul 2003 01:15:55: ( 80.133.106.133, p508566D1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

> You do need to check your server though as the intro is still there!
No, you need to check that you have entered the correct web site URL into your browser!!

I registered and paid for the "www.289register.com" and "www.289register.de" URLs, but the 289 Register members pay (via the annual subscriptions) for the monthly server fees to keep this site open (and the quarterly Newsletter, that I also do in my spare time).

I registered and paid for the "www.289cobra.com" and "www.cobra289.de" URLs, and I also pay the monthly server fees for this site - which links across to the "www.289register.com", and to two of my other web sites.

So if you don't like the "David & Andrea Butchers web site ... in silly bouncing text!!!!!" intro., then please enter the correct web site URL into your browser - and thank the paid-up 289 Register members, without whom you would not have a web site to visit for free and still complain about.

I'm sorry if the above explanation is too complicated for you and further fuels your difficulties with navigating your way around, but I accept that my web sites are not yet completely idiot-proof.


Written by John at 01 Jul 2003 19:20:11: ( 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk )

I notice the silly "it's cold" into it still there!!!!!!!


Written by Contrary Mary (ericandliz.rayner@ntlworld.com) at 30 Jun 2003 23:36:16: ( 62.253.32.7, cache4-nrth.server.ntli.net )

Come on Peter B identify yourself, there seems to be more crap come out of your mouth than Niagra Falls. Your exubarance supasses your ignorance chap. lets see what you can do; please take the site over after putting it too the vote of the members

Eric.


Written by Peter. at 01 Jul 2003 15:40:54: ( 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk )

As if!


Written by Contrary mary (ericandliz.rayner@ntlworld.com) at 03 Jul 2003 12:12:54: ( 62.253.32.7, cache4-nrth.server.ntli.net )

> As if!
Peter,Mmmmmmm not really much effort in your answer chap. Would seem all the derogatory comments that have been made re the site, yourself and some others no one wants to identify themselves! As a member of the 289 register I would agree that there are improvements that could be made, but do we really want to double the yearly members fee as in the CRC for this privilage?

I think your critasisam could have been put in a much less arrogant fashion. What is that saying now, sarcasm is the lowest form of whit, but the highest form of intelligence, the latter not being applicable in your case it would seem! regards Eric


Written by Anon for personal reasons. at 02 Jul 2003 09:25:07: ( 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk )

It matters not who he is. He has made some valid points and has been quite well mannered, unlike David Butcher who has to resort to the use of distasteful wording and direct character assasination.

The intro has become long in the tooth. It's painfully slow and not needed. Some other aspects of the site too are in need of modernising.

David himself stated that the members pay for the site so the least he can do is make it look professional and easy to navigate.

This guy simply made comments. It's a forum and that is what forums are for. I'm not saying that we should all just fall in line with any comments that are made but surely constructive criticism is a good thing.

Personally I also think David is full of his own self importance. Just look at his own web site. Look at the cars he's had/has. Look at the homes he owns. Just look and ask why is all this there. AND all this is likned from the 289 register domain name! If David wants to simmer in the glory of his achievements then the 289 register site should be totally seperate from that and the sites simply should not be linked.

Yes, I agree, it is time for change. Lets have a proper domain name registered and lets have a nice clean site without all the silly bits.

I too remain anon for now. I think it should be fairly obvious why!

Anyone else want to make comment?


Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 02 Jul 2003 13:43:38: ( 80.133.106.133, p508566D1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

Hi Anon for personal reasons,

> It matters not who he is. He has made some valid points and has been quite well mannered, unlike David Butcher who has to resort to the use of distasteful wording and direct character assasination.
I think it was important to establish whether he is a paid-up member of the 289 Register or not (which he evidently isn't). I agree that some valid points were made (this is why I immediately removed the "cold outside" intro and "mouse-trails"). I do not agree that the majority of his comments were well-mannered - I found them particularly offensive and agressive, so decided to fight fire with fire, and have some fun along the way.

>The intro has become long in the tooth. It's painfully slow and not needed. Some other aspects of the site too are in need of modernising.
I would love to completely redo the entire site - but I need to spent a lot of time at work, to pay for our 5 houses, 4 cars, etc. ;-))

> David himself stated that the members pay for the site so the least he can do is make it look professional and easy to navigate.
The membership fees pay for (amongst other things) the monthly server costs, but not my time, which I voluntarily give for free. Anyone who runs their own web site(s) will appreciate how time-consuming this is, those that don't have more time to criticise the efforts of others ....

> This guy simply made comments. It's a forum and that is what forums are for. I'm not saying that we should all just fall in line with any comments that are made but surely constructive criticism is a good thing.
I agreed wholeheartedly - but "constructive" criticism is the key word here. Derogeratory comments from Peter such as "tacky content", "silly intro sequences", "the same crap into that bored people years ago", "pathetic", "End the crap", "full of crap, bad navigation and poor design", "let's have some professionalism here", "carry on with your blatant ignorance", "full of your own self importance" in no way fall into the category of constructive - indeed, I would insist that your description of "distasteful wording and direct character assasination" should be applied here.

> Personally I also think David is full of his own self importance. Just look at his own web site. Look at the cars he's had/has. Look at the homes he owns. Just look and ask why is all this there. AND all this is likned from the 289 register domain name! If David wants to simmer in the glory of his achievements then the 289 register site should be totally seperate from that and the sites simply should not be linked.
I have also placed links to a large number of other assorted web sites, many of which are not directly related to 289s - isn't that just one advantage of the internet? However, since this is a major issue for at least two of the 16500+ 289 Register web site visitors, I will remove the link to my other web sites at the next available opportunity.

> Yes, I agree, it is time for change. Lets have a proper domain name registered and lets have a nice clean site without all the silly bits.
I do not have time to completely rework the 289 Register web site. The "silly bits" were my attempt to add a little fun and liveliness into the site, which has obviously (in the opinion of at least two visitors) failed. As I stated earlier, if anyone is seriously volunteering to take on the task of running the 289 Register web site, I am more than happy to stand down. I would suggest that they
a) join the 289 Register first
b) create their own design and upload their alternative 289 Register web site.
I will then gladly add a link to this site - plus the possibility for any visitors to vote for either of the two sites, and we can review the situation after, say, two months .... but we need someone else to take some constructive action here, rather than just bad-mouthing my humble efforts ....


Written by Peter. at 04 Jul 2003 10:06:07: ( 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk )

> However, since this is a major issue for at least two of the 16500+ 289 Register web site visitors, I will remove the link to my other web sites at the next available opportunity.
??? 15600+ visitors? Where on earth did you get that from? I think what you means is "hits" in which case the actual amount of "visitors" is probably less than 1000.

Even more interesting is the fact that on a quick scan of the forum I could see no more than 40 different posters! Now you can twist that as much as you like but it is blatantly obvious to anyone with even a modicum if sense that your precious web site is not as popular as you may like to think it is and your discussion forum is purely a conversation place for just a handful of members.


Written by David Butcher at 04 Jul 2003 10:48:54: ( 80.133.106.133, p508566D1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

> Even more interesting is the fact that on a quick scan of the forum I could see no more than 40 different posters! Now you can twist that as much as you like but it is blatantly obvious to anyone with even a modicum if sense that your precious web site is not as popular as you may like to think it is and your discussion forum is purely a conversation place for just a handful of members.
Agreed - I set up and run the 289 Register web site solely for the benefit of 289 Register members - of whom only about ten "handfuls" access the internet - but I doubt whether these 50 members account for over 16500 hits, so obviously by far and away the largest number of visitors are non-members. Whether I should amend (or completely redesign) the web site at the insistance of one non-member is debateable, especially since that person claims that the site is apparently so unpopular.

Obviously I am flattered that so many non-members have chosen to visit (and some hopefully even enjoyed) the web site, and amongst these thousands of visitors there is bound to be the odd "expert" who will claim to be able to do it all so much better.

So why don't you forget your jealousy and whingeing, and as the saying goes - "put your money where your mouth is". The challenge has been issued, and if you can come up with the goods, both the "handful" of 289 Register members and thousand(s) of non-member visitors will benefit from your efforts and the perfect 289 Register web site.


Written by Peter. at 04 Jul 2003 14:06:38: ( 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk )

Because I do not consider that to be the correct way to do things. It is unfair of you, or anyone else, to expect me, or anyone else, to build a whole new web site on the off chance that it may be accepted. Surely the best option is to advertise for opinions through the membership? Perhaps it can be included in the next newsletter, etc.

If nothing else this thread has brought some activity to an otherwise very quiet forum!


Written by David Butcher at 04 Jul 2003 16:38:50: ( 80.133.106.133, p508566D1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

I don't agree - you were extremely willing to throw abusive criticism at my efforts, without considering the countless hours of my time that I have invested in this web site - all done on the same terms and conditions - i.e. on the off-chance that it will not be acceptable to the other 289 Register members or visitors - so I feel quite justified in expecting anyone else that wants to take this task on (as you claimed earlier that you did, in point 2 of your Forum entry on 20 Jun 2003 13:00:07) to prove themselves first.

However, since you are only prepared to issue dismissive criticism rather than risk an even greater failure than that which I have achieved (in your opinion), I agree to put the matter to the vote of the 289 Register members, and propose the following .....

I will stand down from the positions of 289 Register Newsletter Editor and Web Site Custodian, with effect from the end of this year (2003). This will give you (or anyone else) six months to prepare for the take-over of these positions. However, if no-one else comes forward to take on these roles, I will gladly put my name forward to continue in these roles, for possible election by the other 289 Register members.

I have added a statement to this effect on the 289 Register web site home page, and will repeat this statement in the Editorial section of the next Newsletter.

I will also give the opportunity to web site visitors to (anonymously, if desired) add their comments (probably in a guest book) shortly, and include a questionnaire in the next Newsletter.

> If nothing else this thread has brought some activity to an otherwise very quiet forum!
Yes, although I don't think it was a particularly useful discussion or exchange of information about 289 Cobras, which is what I intended the Forum to be used for .... still, this may not be my concern for much longer!


Written by Peter at 04 Jul 2003 18:43:30: ( 81.79.46.175, user-1711.bbd06wfd.dsl.pol.co.uk )

Good.


Written by John at 04 Jul 2003 21:02:33: ( 217.163.5.253, unknown host )

> Good.
I have been reading the flow of comments on this subject, well my own web site is not brilliant, but like David I have better things to do. All I can say is David runs the magazine production and the web site and as a member does a great job. I would not take the "p.ss" of someone who puts there own time aside for others in the way David does, yes the site has good and bad, but I believe the good parts out way the bad and I would support David in his efforts. I would recommend if you are so good, join the club. By the way, I have looked at many web sites that are way worse than this one, a good looking web site with rubbish content would not interest me, but a good web site with great content would be up my street.


Written by David Pilbeam (DWPilbeam@aol.com) at 04 Jul 2003 21:50:18: ( 195.93.34.8, cache-loh-ac02.proxy.aol.com )

Perhaps as Secretary of the Register I might make a few points and inject some objective comments into this ridiculous exchange.

Firstly, In any activity there is an aspect of good or bad taste. I believe that Lawrence Lewellyn Bowen is a prat with no taste whatsoever. However there are many that disagree with me. Similarly with web sites. I have seen some great ones and some awful ones. Others might take a different view. If anyone is going to criticise the club web site they had better take this into consideration. Taste is purely a point of view.

Secondly, constructive criticism is always welcome. Abusive crirticism is not. It's generally considered better form and likely to be more productive to go easy criticising someone'e efforts if you really want to achieve change. Anyone so insensitive as to be able to cause the kind of reaction I have seen in Dave Butcher clearly is not, in my opinion, being very constructive. Constructive means offering considered alternatives not just telling Dave that his web site is crap.

Thirdly, as it is not possible to determine if Peter B is a member or not because he has not had the courtesy to identify himself it is difficult to react appropriately. One can only assume he is not a member and as such he cannot be heard to the detriment of those of us who are and who pay their subs.

Fourthly, as officers of the club we give our time freely with no recompense apart from very occasional recent anonymous abuse. David, in particular spends a huge amount of his own time maintaining, developing and updating the website and publishing the newsletter for no reward other than believing he is helping other like minded souls build and enjoy their cars.

Fifthly, anyone is welcome to criticise. Anyone is welcome to take on a role in the club if they:

a. Pay their subs
b. Identify themselves
c. Demonstrate their willingness to put in at least as much effort as the rest of us on the committee
d. Can demonstrate the ability to interact with members of the public and others in the club without unduely pissing them off.

Finally, in my opinion Dave Butcher has done a brilliant job both maintaining and developing the web site and publishing the newsletter. He is a man with many ideas who is not afraid to put his money where his mouth is. I may not always agree with him, but he is never afraid of critcism appropriately given and frankly, if you never try anything new you ain't gonna progress. He has my complete confidence and and support. It would be catastrophic if he resigned at the end of this year. I fear the club would fold if that were to happen, unless, of course, someone else were to take on that role!!!

Peter B - either identify yourself and be prepared to stand behind your comments or kindly shut up and let us enjoy the club with all its faults. Dave Butcher is both identified and prepared to fight his corner. In lieu of any further constructive response I suggest we close the forum to non-members.


Date: 05 Jul 2003 12:44:04
David Butcher (david@289register.com / http://www.289register.com) wrote:

Hi all,

After recent e-mails and Forum entries from people expressing their dissatisfaction with both the 289 Register Web Site and the Newsletter, I have decided to give up both of these posts with effect from the end of 2003. This gives six months for someone else to come forward, which should be ample time. If no-one volunteers , I will consider continuing from 2004 - based upon the opinions expressed in this Guest Book on the web site and the responses that I receive to the next Newsletter.

Regards,

DaveB.


Date: 05 Jul 2003 12:49:32
David Pilbeam (dwpilbeam@aol.com / no homepage) wrote:

Dave Butcher has done a brilliant job both maintaining and developing the web site and publishing the newsletter. I may not always agree with him, but he is never afraid of critcism appropriately given. He has my support. It would be catastrophic if he resigned at the end of this year.

Peter B - either identify yourself and be prepared to stand behind your comments or kindly shut up and let us enjoy the club with all its faults.


Date: 05 Jul 2003 12:50:45
Gerry Hawkridge (gerry@hawkcars.co.uk / http://www.hawkcars.co.uk/) wrote:

What twats have complained ?? I think you have been doing a brilliant job, it is not an easy job, especially from where you are, but you have done it. A thankless unappreciated job at times, carried out brilliantly to an excellent standard, which most clubs must be surely jealous of. I for one fully appreciate and understand the tremendous efforts you have put in. The newsletter and website are really great. I would like to say that I would be very disappointed and upset if you were to resign. Those who criticise would be better spending there time making contributions to be included in your efforts, contributions to club newsletters are frequently lacking in most clubs, if members want different things included, what stops them getting off their arses and sending them to you. Do these people appreciate how much of your time is devoted to doing this job ? Are they prepared to put in as much effort ? I think not.

Please feel free to post this !!!!

Best regards Gerry


Date: 05 Jul 2003 12:53:53
Graham Fry (gf289@aol.com / no homepage) wrote:

Who is this twat Peter B ?........... absolute load of tosh!.

The latest newsletter is superb, heaven knows how much time and hard work went into producing it. I've had it a week and still not managed to read all of it's contents.

I know for a fact that David B spends hours & hours on the website keeping it up to date, whilst David P and I were in Corsica both the two David's would be up until the early hours updating the site to ensure that it contained the very latest information.

David B please don't take to heart the comments of one complete tosser!, you're doing a superb job which is very much appreciated by 99.9% of the membership. Remember you heard it here first............... Peter B (does the "B" stand for bollocks) is a complete and utter Twat!!

Graham


Date: 05 Jul 2003 18:37:50
Ian Millar (imillar@waitrose.com / no homepage) wrote:

Harsh criticism from one non-person should not be the reason for the register to lose such an enthusiastic and hard working website and newsletter writer. I am sure the attitude displayed by this non-person is extremely upsetting to David but I would bet that ALL register members support you, David.

I can only add my thanks and support for all the efforts and resulting site and newsletter that David Butcher produces.

I hope other register members make an effort to let David Butcher know that he has their support.


Date: 06 Jul 2003 10:41:33
Roger King (rs.k@virgin.net / no homepage) wrote:

Could we stop this nonsense now, please? We all know the web population includes a large number of morons. Read any other owners' club magazines and you'll find irritating things and items you're not the slightest bit interested in - but these publications are nonetheless essential to both maintenance and enjoyment of the cars.

The only mistake Dave Butcher made was to respond to an anonymous complaint. Maybe the forum should be for paid-up members only?


Date: 06 Jul 2003 13:55:17
simon winter (simonjrwinter@hotmail.com / no homepage) wrote:

I think ANYONE running a website for ANY club deserves the FULL backing of their members. If any of them have a problem, or would like to suggest an alternative way of doing something, they should at least have the guts to say so and not write anonymously.

As a very new member, I was very impressed with my first newsletter the other day as well as the website.

The website and magazine is only as good as the people who contribute, so can I urge everyone to get off their bottoms and write something !!


Date: 07 Jul 2003 08:57:11
John Abel (john_abel289@hotmail.com / no homepage) wrote:

I like the 289 register above any other club due to this web site. The technical articles are brilliant and the people are great. "Peter B" in my view does not speak for a true 289 members, also I hope he does not join, we do not need members like this!!. David puts so much time in and does an excellent Job. I support David and ask him to carry on; he does the best for the club and members.

My vote goes with David!!!


Written by Pat (patmoorish@hotmail.com) at 07 Jul 2003 10:32:00: ( 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

I have posted a non-biased, non-members opinion in the new forum. Some good points have , I think, been raised here and so how about taking the opportunity to improve things.

Date: 07 Jul 2003 09:56:43
Pat Moore (patmoorish@hotmail.com / no homepage) wrote:

I would like to comment. I am not a member of the club (yet) but have been around for some time. I have two 289's. I think it would be quite sad to restrict the forum to members only. It would be difficult to manage too. Whoever Peter B is I personally think some here are being rather harsh with him. He made a suggestion that the site be upgraded and some of the "silly bits" removed. So what? I think the site needed that too. In fact David Butcher must have thought so as he did actually alter the site. I think the site is brilliant. Plenty of content and the newsletter (which I receive via someone else) is also good. There is always room for betterment though and the web site in particular is a good contender. The intro has been there for years and is just so damn annoying. The navigation is poor (how, for instance, do I get back to the site from the page I am typing this into!!!!!????) and often you can end up on a page with no alternative route to starting over and that means.... more intro!! I can understand the frustration of some when the likes of Peter B posts anonymously but surely you can understand why he did that. Would you want your head on the block just for mentioning some poor site content? I understand this from both sides and consider him "sensible" for remaining anonymous.

I think David Butcher has done a wonderful job and considering he in unpaid for his efforts then I shake his hand. Why does he have to sulk though? Reading the thread on the forum it was suggested that the site be upgraded. David then not only went all defensive (understandable I suppose) but also attacked the suggestion. He then made changes to the site (good) and then sulked some more, eventually sulking so much that he tendered his resignation. So, although he does a wonderful job (far from perfect though) he obviously buckles under the slightest criticism and to be honest I think that is rather poor. I AM NOT ATTACKING DAVID BUTCHER HERE but the sites which are/were linked from the 289 site are, as Peter B stated, full of self importance. Maybe he is just quite simply conceited.

I must say too that the tone of David’s replies have been far from correct and have been quite offensive and that again is poor from an officer of the club. Especially the officer who is in charge of the web site and newsletter. Again, I am not attacking here – just saying an opinion.

Change is no bad thing. Fresh blood etc. Maybe it is time for change here, maybe not. Anything which does not change becomes boring and the fresh blood may bring some refreshing changes from which everyone can benefit. So, in conclusion from a regular non-member visitor, I suggest that the club considers all options carefully and does what is best for the members and visitors as opposed to what may be best for David Butcher’s CV! Some clubs insist on changes ever three years to avoid things like this and that may be a good option here. Web site publishing is not the big challenge it used to be and can be successfully done by most people with a PC and just a little artistic flair. I will be joining the register soon and if it comes to the vote I will certainly vote for someone new which is no slant on David Butcher (I don’t even know the guy!) but just what I think would be best for the members and longevity of the club.

You allegedly have two 289s, but aren't prepared to pay the £10 per annum club membership, preferring to scrounge a copy of the Newsletter from someone else who does pay their subs. - shame on you !!


Written by Dave Woodward at 07 Jul 2003 16:49:15: ( 81.134.8.243, host81-134-8-243.in-addr.btopenworld.com )

Peter,

Why do you feel the need to be so offensive all the time?

Its really quite simple - if you don't like it as much as you suggest, why do you keep coming back? Your comments have been received. Thankyou for your input.

If you wish to recommend additional content, or maybe even to write a series of articles sharing your skills and knowledge, I'm sure they will be gratefully received - Better and more effective than adopting a personal attack on one individuals work.

I am a paid up member of the register, and find the site very useful. I am sure that if you could overcome your personal issues with the 'look and feel', you would also find the content of benefit - who knows, you may even wish to join! If not, go away.

David puts in significant personal time and effort to manage the site and produce the newsletters. As far as I am aware, all members (bar one) are quite happy with that.

The site is a light hearted and friendly forum in which we can ALL keep in touch and learn from one another. This is not some large corporate with resources dedicated to web management and marketing. I am building my own 289 currently and have found the site a valuable source of knowledge and support - a better group you are unlikely to find.


Written by Peter B at 07 Jul 2003 21:40:00: ( 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

> Why do you feel the need to be so offensive all the time?
Maybe you can explain the above?

My posts are not offensive all the time whereas those directed towards me from David B have been.


Written by Cobraman Clive at 07 Jul 2003 16:36:14: ( 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

Just on the point of poor navigation. Yes I agree, it's awful. One of the reasons for that though is the fact that my browser buttons dissapear when the site loads up. This is the only site which does this. It is me or is it the site? When the browser dissapears you then have no control over "next Page", "previous page", etc. so you cannot easily navigate yourseld, for instance, to the last page you looked at.

Please David, no insults re paper bags. This is a serious question and maybe the cause of much frustration.

Perhpas this is what the grumbles on the site navigation are all about?


Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 08 Jul 2003 00:04:33: ( 80.133.100.65, p50856441.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

Hello Clive,

Don't worry, if anyone raises a serious point, I will attempt to give a serious answer. If they only issue destructive criticism full of abuse a la Peter B., then I will probably respond in a similar tone.

So your answer is No, it is not your browser. After I found a large number of my photographs that I had placed on this web site had been stolen (i.e. someone had placed them on another web site without the courtesy to ask me first, and then refused to add a credit to the source afterwards), I deliberately wrote a small piece of code that removed the browser menu buttons (and on some pages, additionally disabled the right-mouse-click-to-save feature), to make it a little more difficult to steal the photos (it was quicker and easier to do this than to add a copyright watermark to all of my photos, or to take legal action against this individual). The removal of the top browser menu had the added benefit (?) of allowing more space for text and pictures on the 289 Register visitor's monitor.

However, I added (at the same time) a BACK button at the bottom of EVERY single page on the web site (to allow you to return to the page that you have just come from), plus a coloured bar to enable you to return to the Home Page (which may or may not be the same as the page that you have just come from), to compensate for this loss.

I did not document this feature anywhere on the site, because I thought it was self-explanatory (to me, at least!) .... the only limitation is that your Browser will have to have Java enabled for this button and bar to work - but is anyone still using a browser without Java ? (if so, you're missing out on a lot more on other sites).

Incidentally, this "feature" of removed Browser menu buttons is very easy to bypass - if Peter B. was really up to taking over the 289 Register web site, he would surely have been able to figure this out for himself, rather than fire off a set of insults about the site design, navigational problems and myself ....

Hopefully this explanation will help Peter B. and everyone else navigate the site more easily in future until someone else takes it over and finally perfects it


Written by Cobraman Clive at 08 Jul 2003 09:03:30: ( 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

Although I see your point the way you have done this is totally pathetic. You are messing about with peoples browsers and causing much inconvenience. That, David, is just not on and is very unfair. I for one have not noticed the back button and as it is at the bottom of the page it may go un-noticed by many. I would like to be able to use my browser buttons please! No other site does this and you are not being clever be doing it. I also am not clever enough to see a way around it as I am not a web designer.

I must say too that although you gave me an answer it was full of sarcasm and like someone said on your new comments page that is not acceptable from an officer of the club.

You need to calm down, take a a pill or something. Stop playing God and having a pop at people at every opportunity.

I, like many others, have been watching this thread and took it with a pinch of salt but now I have to admit that I actually agree with Peter B in that you need replacing. Sorry but that is how you make me feel.

Your tone, sarcasm and choice of wording is often offensive and not appreciated.


Little wonder that you now agree with Peter B, since you are sending these postings from one and the same PC !!

Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 08 Jul 2003 12:27:04: ( 80.133.100.65, p50856441.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

There was no sarcasm intended (at least, not towards yourself), I had simply attempted to explain why I had set up the web site that way. If you don't agree with my reasons, it would have been sufficient to politely say so. Had Peter B. taken a more civil approach initially, I would have taken the trouble to explain this to him too.

I'm sorry to see that you have adopted the Peter B. insultive approach now ....

> "totally pathetic .... I must say too that although you gave me an answer it was full of sarcasm .... You need to calm down, take a a pill or something. Stop playing God and having a pop at people at every opportunity .... Your tone, sarcasm and choice of wording is often offensive and not appreciated."
I don't understand why you both feel this aggressive abuse to be so necessary, but if that's how you guys get your kicks ....


Written by Cobraman Clive at 08 Jul 2003 13:33:40: ( 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

> I don't understand why you both feel this aggressive abuse to be so necessary, but if that's how you guys get your kicks
I think you need to read your previous posts in this thread, paying particular attention to your choice of wording.

You have a damn cheek calling me abusive when you have been so blatantly abusive, in fact more so, than my post ever was.

Yes, please, resign. You are no longer required and it really is time for change. Maybe we can have someone who does not fire abuse back at each opportunity and can instead use a little diplomacy. Look at the responses on the new comment/vote forum. Most (if not all!) of the supportive ones are from your friends. Not really a balanced debate that.


Date: 08 Jul 2003 11:36:11
Brian (no email / no homepage) wrote:

Oh dear. As someone who is known by Gerry, David, Phil and others I too have decided to remain anon due to the obvious flack I would receive!

I agree that change to club officers should be scheduled and I also agree that David messes about with the club site too much. There are too many silly bits and the overall look of the site is unprofessional. Yes, I know you do it for nothing but I would rather pay someone to do it properly than leave it like it is. You do mess about too much. You have, for instance, made this page more difficult to read by doing the changes you did yesterday. The removal of browser buttons to is unacceptable. If you don't want people to "steal" your images then use a right click block or watermark or, even better, don't publish them in the first place. To inconvenience everyone just because you have a few pictures copied is, in my opinion, bad behavior. Remember, this is not your web site, it belongs to the register. If someone used my pictures I'd be flattered!

The other thing I could never understand is the fact that the club website and newsletter are produced by someone in Germany! OK, live where you want but surely a UK based person would be more "in touch". Yes yes yes, I know were an international register but let’s be honest the majority of members are in the UK and the other committee members are in the UK.

I think change is no bad thing in this case. Move over David and bow out gracefully. You've done yourself proud but I think it's time for someone new to come in with a different approach to freshen up what has become a quite boring and difficult to use web site. Sorry but we’re all entitled to our opinion and that’s mine. No offence meant.


Date: 08 Jul 2003 13:38:08
Cobraman Clive (no email / no homepage) wrote:

Yes, we need a change. David Butcher is not the right person to be in control of the register website and in fact I consider his resignation at the end of the year to long to wait. Personally I think he should resign and go now. We simply do not want anyone with his outlook and offensive nature in control of what is a public domain site. He is a twister of words and comments for his own gain and simply will not accept criticism.

Yes indeed, replace him and make our website a friendlier and easier place to visit without all the personal glory crap of David Butcher.


Date: 08 Jul 2003 14:33:30
David Pilbeam (DWPilbeam@aol.com / no homepage) wrote:

Calling for improvements to the web site and newsletter is all very well usually until volunteers are sought to take on the job. If you are prepared to devote as much time as David does to that position or you know someone who would be prepared to stand for election then fine. I suspect though that as always whenever we seek committee members to take on work for the club there is a distinct evaporation of interest or it lasts for a month or two until the enthusiasm wears off. In any case committee members can only be drawn from the members so if you ain't one you don't get a vote. If you are a member and are prepared to volunteer some time why not contribute to the newsletter. If you can't even do that I suggest you haven't the time or aptitude to take on the more substantial role of newsletter editor (for which David writes a good number of articles) or web site custodian. Let us receive some contributions from the critics and we might be more inclined to listen. I am sorry but if you don't like it either work with us to change it - and that means more than just carping - or don't renew your subs at the end of the year.


Date: 08 Jul 2003 17:55:13
Brian (no email / no homepage) wrote:

Yes I understand your point of view but unless a position is advertised it cannot be filled. It seems to be assumed that David will automatically take on the same roll year after year. No alternative has ever been offered to the membership. I am a member and I have to admit I know nothing about website publishing BUT maybe other members do. My concern is the attitude of David and the way in which he seems to use the "club site" for his own gains/rewards. His attitude towards those that make criticism is disgusting. His choice of words is sometimes unacceptable (although I must say some of the comments on this page contain worse grammar!!) His sarcasm and direct insults are unacceptable and I personally would like to see any committee member who behaves like this removed from their post. On the point of listening when you have received contributions... naughty that. You should always listen to the members. You don't have to agree with them but you should always listen. They didn't vote you in so that you can do your own thing. Again, the website is a prime example. The overriding of browser navigation buttons, for example, - has the membership been asked? It is just totally unacceptable to control visitors (and members) PC's in that way. I consider it worse than playing music! It looks stupid and makes for difficult navigation. We’re here to help people, not make life difficult.

The web site is an absolute joke. It is unprofessional, slow, difficult to use and has far to many personal traits of the writer. David’s argument for playing with browsers only strengthen the belief that he considers the web site his own – and its not his own is it?!

If David has to be the custodian of the web site (or indeed in anyone else takes the job) the content and design have to be dictated by the members. If just one member says they don’t like it then, providing its not something silly, the site should be changed. I, for instance, cannot tolerate slow page transitions. They are old fashioned and not needed. I also dislike the lack of browser buttons and the overall tacky design which is now old and boring. Other clubs do better, some don’t but can’t we strive to be the best here?!


Date: 08 Jul 2003 22:27:05
David Butcher (david@289register.com / http://www.289register.com) wrote:

> the way in which he seems to use the "club site" for his own gains/rewards .... he considers the web site his own – and its not his own is it?!
I personally paid the then costs of £3,- per month for the server space for the club web site from February 1999 until April 2002 (£114), plus the initial costs of registering the URLs and setting up the site (£90).

I reclaimed the server space costs from April 2002 until April 2003 from the club (£80).

I have paid for the server charges in advance until April 2004, but have not yet claimed the costs from April 2003 back yet (£51).

So, to date the members have paid £80 and I have paid £255 (out of a total of £335) for the web site (not counting the hours of my time that I have spent on it) - and I am very proud of it, warts and all.

So where are my "own gains/rewards" here? Beats me.

On the subject of the club Newsletter, I have not yet claimed the cost of printing the last version (£570 for printer materials, paper and postage to UK) back from the club.

In order to take the club Newsletter to colour (at my initiative), I purchased an almost-new HP 4500 colour laser printer in March 2003 (at a cost of £530) - I have paid for this printer out of my own pocket, and have not/will not ask for any financial reimbursement from the club for this investment.

Just try finding any other member with the committment/stupidity to do any of this!

So please make sure that you know all the facts before you start issuing hopelessly incorrect statements !!

Yes, I lost my halo many years ago, but is it any wonder why I get so upset by such whingeing abusive attacks?

The positions of 289 Register Web Site Custodian and Newsletter Producer have now been advertised - all applications to the Club Secretary, David Pilbeam, please (assuming that you want him to continue in this same roll, year after year!). I humbly suggest that those that have requested/insisted on my replacement get together as soon as possible, to ensure the continuation of the club web site and Newsletter in whatever form that they think is best ....


Date: 08 Jul 2003 23:15:40
Peter ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

So, you paid the costs of the server, etc. Maybe that's why you consider the site your very own, obviously.

Well I consider that very wrong and it's about time the club paid for it's own site. Come on committee, hand in pocket please. Pay David back and let's have a proper setup here. Just what the hell is going on allowing this situation to arise?

As for you losing your halo many years ago due to attacks - that then proves that this is not new and that you have obviosuly offended people in the past.

You NEED replacing, urgently.


Date: 09 Jul 2003 00:05:29
David Butcher (david@289register.com / http://www.289register.com) wrote:

Peter,

I simply stated the facts in my reply to Brian, but did not wish to infer in any way that the 289 Register were reluctant to pay - indeed, I have been refunded ALL expenses that I have submitted to date, and it was MY choice alone to finance such a large portion of both the web site and Newsletter costs. I don't expect you to understand this - but I get a lot of enjoyment from my BRA 289, and am in a fortunate position of being able to share just some of this fun with others in many ways, just one of which was helping out the club members and web site visitors with my time and money. If most of the members or visitors were like you, I would feel very differently about this indeed. However, I'm sure that most of the web site visitors appreciate this gesture (although until today, only the 289 Register committee members were aware that I was financially subsidising the club).

I never said that I lost my halo "due to attacks", and that I have "obviously offended people in the past"? Talk about twisting words!!! I just meant that, although probably sweet and innocent at birth, I was not perfect in my responses to previous postings (including yours). I wonder if you had invested even a fraction of your time and money in the club, and then received similar aggressive abuse belittling your efforts from someone who hadn't the guts to even admit who he/she is, how would you have reacted?

Anyway, the club Secretary (plus the other club members and web site visitors) are now awaiting your much-needed services to volunteer as my immediate replacement. I wish you all the best in your new roles, and I look forward to enjoying your best efforts in the near future (unless you're too scared to risk being on the receiving end of the sort of criticism that you're only too willing to give out) ....


Written by Roger King (rs.k@virgin.net) at 08 Jul 2003 18:35:29: ( 81.107.199.75, client-1868-p1-sms.winn.adsl.virgin.net )

Before we start throwing things again: I'm no computer expert by any stretch of anyone's imagination, but my browser buttons are all still there and function on this site in exactly the same way they do on any other. What is this 'navigation' issue?


Written by David Butcher (david@289register.com) at 08 Jul 2003 19:56:22: ( 80.133.103.229, p50856E3A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

The code that I added removes the upper menu in Internet Explorer, perhaps it doesn't work for other browsers?

Oh what the hell, I think I'll just give in and remove the code - or would that be considered by some to be abusive and sarcastic of me?


Written by John at 08 Jul 2003 23:10:41: ( 81.77.114.178, user-690.bbd07tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

> Oh what the hell, I think I'll just give in and remove the code - or would that be considered by some to be abusive and sarcastic of me?
No, on the contrary it would be very sensible. The fact is that the code whould't have been put there in the first place.

See you still have to have a poke back at people to. Sarcastic twat.


Written by David Butcher at 09 Jul 2003 11:56:23: ( 80.133.110.58, p50856E3A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

> No, on the contrary it would be very sensible. The fact is that the code whould't have been put there in the first place.
You, and the other posters here, shouldn't really criticise without being fully aware of the facts behind my actions. Contrary to "playing God", "messing with peoples browsers", etc., the reason why I added this code was to make it somewhat more difficult for indiscriminate visitors to steal photos from this web site for their own gain.

Imagine that you are a member of the 289 Register, and had sent me photographs and details of your car for me to place on your page in the Members and Their Cars section. If these same photos then appeared, with the description of your car, on an internet web site advertising the car for sale, would you be flattered that someone had stolen these photos? I think not.

On behalf of the club member, I contacted the web site (in German) where the car was advertised (www.mobile.de), insisting that the advert was removed. Mobile.de refused to do this, stating that only the person that had placed the advert could remove it. I then visited our local Criminal Police Station, who were also unable to take any action against the person that placed the advert, because no law had been broken or damage had been done.

I then decided to add the code to remove the top browser menus, to make it slightly more difficult for someone to repeat such an act.

And no, I don't know what this individual had to gain by advertising someone elses' car for sale - I couldn't ask them, because he/she chose to remain anonymous (they gave the e-mail address of the owner as contact details in the advert).

So to all the posters that decided to have a go at me - please ask politely first, there is usually method behind any madness, and you're less likely to get the explanation if you dive straight in with abusive comments.

I'll await with great interest to see what better solution Peter B. and my other many critics manage to come up with once they have been approved by the rest of the committee and taken everything over from me.


Date: 09 July 2003 14:02:55
289joe (no email / no homepage) wrote:

The committe has obviously made a very big bluner here. If, as David says, the domain names are registered to him then that is crazy. The domain should be registered to the club and, in my opinion, at an UK address.

The recent post (below) states that the domain will continue to be used by David after his resignation. Seems very revengeful that.

He also offers the domains for sale and I think the club should make a suitable offer without delay for any which are relevant and arrange their immediate transfer to a UK hosting service.

.com domain names can be purchased for as little as £10 but more realistically around £30 and if need be the club could register another suitable domain.

Just for the record - I think change would be a good thing too.


Written by 289joe at 09 Jul 2003 13:56:06: ( 62.188.4.50, 1Cust50.tnt14.lnd1.gbr.da.uu.net )

> I'll await with great interest to see what better solution Peter B. and my other many critics manage to come up with once they have been approved by the rest of the committee and taken everything over from me.
Can't wait. I too am sick to death of your grumbling and moaning. Whoever takes over I'm sure they will have a more positive and polite outlook that you have. You've been in Germany too long.


Written by David Butcher at 09 Jul 2003 14:49:35: ( 80.133.110.58, p50856E3A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

> You've been in Germany too long.
I'm curious as to what led you to make this statement? and how is it related to the other complaints about the web site?


Date: 09 July 2003 17:17:01
Pete (no email / no homepage) wrote:

Oh bloody hell. What the **** is this all about then. It's only taken me about two hrs to fathom the story thus far. The way i see it someone had a maon. David fought back (maybe a little sarcastically) and then a few others joined in and also had a pop at David. A few of David's loyal supporters (committee members!) came in supporting David (and so they should)and then a few others came in and the whole job is basically f****d!

David has gone off into a major sulk and threatened to take the domain away from club use (It should not be registered to him anyway) and the newsletter will die along with the web site. All in all a major disaster.

Reading between the lines David wants out anyway and there is obviously no one in the pipe line to replace him. This will cause a lot of upset but it's not the end of civilisation as we know it. Lets move on. If David has tendered his resignation then so be it. What we don't need is for this to be ruined long term. Lets just find someone who can write web sites and someone else who will take on the role of newsletter man and that's it. Easier said than done maybe but until one tries one will not succeed. To harp on like this gets no one anywhere. Lets just move on. Pay David off, advertise the post, find someone and move on. Simple. What is happening at present is childish and unnecessary and now that the relationship is tainted there is only one way to go - forwards!


Date: 09 July 2003 18:06:16
David Butcher (david@289register.com / http://www.289register.com) wrote:

Hi Pete,

Not a bad summary of the last three weeks! Well done.

I never initially considered resigning (and certainly didn't want out), but considering the huge resentment expressed in various postings (including two complaining about the fact that I live in Germany!), I have been convinced that - in the long term at least - it is best for the club if someone else took over both positions.

The next Newsletter is almost complete, and is due out in about six weeks, by which time I will have finished and printed it - so that my replacement will have almost 5 months to get the next Newsletter completed.


Written by Many members at 10 Jul 2003 09:51:24: ( 62.188.1.35, 1Cust35.tnt13.lnd1.gbr.da.uu.net )

David you're a twat. You had support from both committee members and others and yet you still chose to remove all connection to the register and it's members from the site. What you have done is very unfair considering there is no replacement yet. The site was a good source of info, pictures and a place where people could find more about the register. You are a professional sulker. Your resignation is obviously no bad thing and the sooner the register moves on without you the better it will be for the membership. Good riddence.


Written by David Butcher at 10 Jul 2003 11:36:03: ( 80.133.110.58, p50856E3A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

Hi Many members,

This e-mail is not directed at the poster personally, but since you claim to speak for Many members, I ask them all to re-read my earlier correspondance - in which I did offer quite clearly to continue running the 289 Register web site AND the Newsletter until the end of this year, to give my many critics (and supporters) 6 months to find a replacement - which I thought was both fair and realistic. This was strongly rejected by a number of subsequent posters (some of whom claimed to be members or representing members), who demanded that I was immediately removed from the committee!!

Since I am not actually as "self-important" as some posters claim (i.e. I know that I am not irreplaceable), I reluctantly decided to accept the majority decision (apparently it was only my friends and the committee supporting me - although some positive responses were from "friends" that I have never met and didn't know). Now you're complaining that I have left with immediate effect - make your minds up, you can't have your cake and eat it!

I have also offered to finish and print out the next Newsletter (due out in just under 2 months time) - if the other 289 Register members are happy with that. This will give almost 5 months for my replacement to come forward, which again I think is fair and should be ample time.

At least you think that I can sulk professionally - after having been told in no uncertain terms how "unprofessional" etc. my best efforts on the web site were. If you believe that you would have reacted differently to the critics (because your shoulders are much broader than mine, or because you would have done such a perfect job that there would have been no room for criticism in the first place), then you are obviously a much better candidate to run the web site and newsletter in the future, so where is the problem?

Instead of continually criticising whatever action I take (or don't take), why don't you direct your activity and time more constructively into rebuilding the 289 Register web site that you hated so much, but now suddenly seem to miss?!?!


Written by Many at 10 Jul 2003 11:56:23: ( 62.188.8.99, 1Cust99.tnt16.lnd1.gbr.da.uu.net )

The point is that you had support and still chose to remove the site. It matters not about your critics. You have let your supporters down.

> Now you're complaining that I have left with immediate effect - make your minds up, you can't have your cake and eat it!
There are no minds to make up. Some were critical - others were not. You chose to act on the comments of critics - not supporters. You are a sulker. You are also self important, a boaster and a sarcastic twat.

> If you really want the "crap", "boring", "unprofessional" etc. web site reinstated, I could do this is a matter of minutes (I haven't deleted it from my PC yet, so could easily upload it again), but that was certainly not the impression that I got from the many earlier postings!
No, please don't re-instate it. It was crap. It was boring and please delete it from your PC so it cannot be brought back from the death. Now this is an honest opinion - not a critisicm. Many thought the site was crap. The links were crap and your other sites are crap and full of self important shite.

> I have also offered to finish and print out the next Newsletter (due out in just under 2 months time) - if the other 289 Register members are happy with that. This will give almost 5 months for my replacement to come forward, which again I think is fair and should be ample time.
Are we supposed to be grateful David? Sorry but I think all hint of saying thank you to you has long gone.

> Instead of continually criticising whatever action I take (or don't take), why don't you direct your activity and time more constructively into rebuilding the 289 Register web site that you all hated so much, but now seem to miss?!?! (but still manage to complain about, even after its deletion)
Let me tell you, it's not missed at all. The point was that you removed it when it was the only source of register info and when some supporters clearly wanted it to stay. Leave it deleted David. You actions, sarcasm and comments during the last few weeks has shown us a different side which is not pleasant. Take your precious URL and sit in a corner somewhere and cry.

Like we said earlier, good riddance.


Written by David Butcher at 10 Jul 2003 13:54:32: ( 80.133.110.58, p50856E3A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

> The point is that you had support and still chose to remove the site. It matters not about your critics. You have let your supporters down.
I am truly sorry that I let my few supporters down by giving in to such a strong wave of aggressive criticism which ran for over three weeks - I know only too well that this was not the correct reaction, but I do not have to tolerate this sort of abuse from anyone at work (where I am being paid), and was certainly not prepared to tolerate this sort of abuse in my private life. I would ask the members that I have let down to consider how they would have reacted if they had received such abusive criticism of their best efforts - if it wouldn't have upset them, then they should be running the web site instead.

I'm surprised that you state that it matters not about my critics, since you are one of them! Does this mean that your opinions are also not valid?

> No, please don't re-instate it. It was crap. It was boring and please delete it from your PC so it cannot be brought back from the death. Now this is an honest opinion - not a critisicm. Many thought the site was crap. The links were crap and your other sites are crap and full of self important shite.
So why shouldn't the 289 Register web site have been deleted, what purpose did it serve if it was so bad, and what is all the fuss about letting people down now - surely I had let them down 4 1/2 years ago when I started up this "crap". Or if it really was so bad, perhaps the members let themselves down by not volunteering/insisting to take over from me earlier and run a proper web site themselves. Incidentally, my private site had been running for over a year before I volunteered to start up the 289 Register web site, so no-one can claim that they couldn't see what my personal limitations and faults were, even then.

> Are we supposed to be grateful David? Sorry but I think all hint of saying thank you to you has long gone.
I'm not seeking any gratitude from anyone (which is probably just as well, given the amount of recent hostility towards me!). I genuinely deeply care (still!) about the 289 Register - my major concern is that the agressive criticism aimed at me recently by fellow members and visitors may well put any potential volunteers off taking over, and that the 289 Register will be either be swallowed up by the CRC, or will fizzle out. Please don't accuse me again of being self-important here, I don't doubt that many others are far more capable than I ever will be of running a web site, just my past experience shows that volunteers are extremely hard to find (as opposed to critics, who are lurking around every corner) - but hopefully someone will come forward soon and prove me to be wrong (again).

To date I have received only praise for my efforts with the Newsletter (but for one comment about the content of the last edition, but at least it was a constructive and non-abusive criticism which I welcomed and noted), so I had considered continuing to produce this, but since the critics were calling for me to be thrown off the committee completely, I gave in to the pressure and resigned from both posts. If the "many members" behind this posting care to identify yourselves, you could save the 289 Register a considerable amount of money - I needn't print out and send a copy of the next Newsletter to you!

> You actions, sarcasm and comments during the last few weeks has shown us a different side which is not pleasant. Take your precious URL and sit in a corner somewhere and cry. Like we said earlier, good riddance.
The aggression and non-constructive criticism (including yours) during the last few weeks aimed at my efforts has shown me a different side of (some of) the members and visitors, which I find equally disagreeable. But why not stop wasting your time having a go at me? Pick up the gauntlet (or poison chalice, as one supporter so aptly put it!) and get on with sorting out the mess that my imperfection has left behind.


Date: 10 July 2003 19:06:09
David Butcher (david@289register.com / http://www.289register.com) wrote:

In a belated response to 289joe, who stated that "the committe has obviously made a very big bluner here. If, as David says, the domain names are registered to him then that is crazy. The domain should be registered to the club and, in my opinion, at an UK address" ....
This serious allegation against the other committee members is just another ridiculous comment born out of ignorance of the facts, and I would like to take the time to defend all the other committee members here.

Going back a number of years, Frank Allen founded the 289 Register, and John Davies (to the best of my knowledge, he was the first Secretary of the club) organised the inaugural meeting in April 1997 (we were there, where were you?). After his work committments increased, John asked for volunteers to take over from him and take the club up to the next level - this was in early 1999. As I recall, only a handful of the then 80 or so club members could be bothered to step forwards - David Pilbeam as Secretary and Newsletter Editor, Mark Way as Technical Advisor, Paul Alexander as Regalia, Graham Fry as Events Co-ordinator and myself as Web Site Custodian (apologies if I missed out any names here!). None of us were voted in as a committee, we won the positions simply by default.

Living in Germany, I chose to use a web site provider in this country rather than at an address in UK, because we are talking about the WORLD WIDE WEB (that is what www. in any URL stands for), and it makes (almost) no difference (to access time, etc.) on which island/continent the server is physically located! I could not register the URLs to the "289 Register" club, because I could not enter a direct debit or standing order (to pay for the URLs and the monthly charges) against an account that was not my own!

Because we didn't have a Treasurer, I chose to pay all the costs out of my own pocket until such time as the dust settled, the web site was up and running (whatever your opinion is of it now), and we needed more space on the server. By that point (April 2002), Geoff Law had joined the ranks of the committee as Treasurer, and I claimed the server costs from April 2002 until April 2003 back from the club.

So, if anyone is to blame for this "crazy" situation, then it is ME (again), and certainly not any of the other (past or present) committee members.

Please try keeping your fingers away from the keyboard until you know what you are talking about.

Finally, you state "the domain will continue to be used by David after his resignation. Seems very revengeful that."
Why revengeful? Since I paid for the URLs (we've been there already) and will not submit any invoices to the 289 Register for the server space after 4th July 2003, and I have already paid the provider up front until 4th April 2004, am I not entitled to use the domain? I have left all material that is non-specific to the 289 Register on the site, and will add further pages to it as time allows. Surely this will complement the new, fresh and brilliant 289 Register web site once it is up and running, and serve as an (albeit "crap" "unprofessional" etc.) alternative for any enthusiasts of 289s and their replicas in the interim period? I really do not understand what your problem is here.


Date: 11 July 2003 22:52:51
David Butcher (david@289register.com / http://www.289register.com) wrote:

I am very aware that I have let a large number of 289 Register members and web site visitors down recently by removing many of the pages from this site - for which I am truly sorry and offer my apologies, especially to those that have expressed their support either publicly or in private e-mails to me - but surely that provides all the more incentive for someone (perhaps one of the whingeing posters that led to this rash reaction?!) to get on and develop the long-overdue fresh, new and better site?

It really is a shame that I can't post some of the private e-mails that I have received recently to be read by all, some of them are very funny indeed!

Meanwhile, in order to continue helping both 289 Register members and visitors to this web site sell or find their 289s or parts, I have reinstated the "For Sale" and "Wanted" pages on my revised site - but there is now no need to keep the Members and Non-Members items on separate pages. So if you want to buy or sell a 289 or any spare parts, please keep sending me your adverts to me via e-mail, they will appear here shortly ....


Date: 15 July 2003 01:21:00
David Pilbeam (DWPIlbeam@aol.com / no homepage) wrote:

I have carefully read through all of the messages on this Comments page and there seems to be some generally ignorant criticism of the committee and a reasonably clear sentiment from a number of posters for the current committee as a whole to stand down. I can't speak for the rest of the committee but I like DavidB have served for over 4 years at some cost to myself both in time and expense but nevertheless with a great deal of enthusiasm and enjoyment. This is the normal way of clubs and organisations such as ours and they are invariably founded on the work and enthusiasm freely given by a very small minority of members. I have my own personal reasons for stepping down from being Secretary and fully intended to do so at the end of the year. Given the circumstances I think now is as good or bad a time as any to resign and let others take over. I fully intend to continue as a member, if allowed, but purely on the back benches.

If any member or members would like to stand as Secretary I am sure we can arrange for a vote. In the meantime you all know where I am...in my Hawk 289, enjoying the good weather grieving not for the club as it is but looking forward to what you guys are going to make it...../DavidP


Date: 22 July 2003 09:48:44
John (no email / no homepage) wrote:

I don't know how you drew your conclusions David P because the only critisicm here is re David Butchers roll, web site style and general attitude, which is appalling anyway. I spoke to a few members recently and none of them have a bad word to say about you or any other committee member except David Butcher and we think he has brought most of this on himself as a result of his childish behaviour, poor atitude and silly web site style. His various "look at me and how good I am" scribbles on his other sites have done him no favours either. DB's recent cocky attitude re the 289 site and the offering of the domains for sale etc. have only gone to reassure people that the time has come for him to go. You say you are standing down anyway and to be honest after serving for four years then why not. It's unpaid work and so others should do some of it.


Written by Pete at 24 Jul 2003 15:39:04: ( 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

So what's happening then? All seems quiet here and that's not productive at all.


Written by David Butcher at 24 Jul 2003 19:05:15: ( 80.133.110.58, p50856E3A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

I think everyone that called for my resignation / dismissal is waiting for someone else to step forward and take over the web site and Newsletter from me .... agreed, not very productive indeed, but this wasn't my choice for the future of the 289 Register ....


Written by Pete at 25 Jul 2003 09:44:31: ( 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

Not your choice? The register's main communication and info point are ruined and you David caused it all with your attitude. So don't come here saying it wasn't your choice because if it hadn't have been for your obnoxious behavior it wouldn’t have got to this. Your very unprofessional and insulting fight backs caused more rift than all the other posters combined. So do us all a favour and piss off.

Now than, has someone got any proper input aside from David’s constant sarcastic remarks?


Written by David Butcher at 26 Jul 2003 01:19:50: ( 80.133.100.137, p50856489.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

> So do us all a favour and piss off.
As I had explained earlier, this web site (and the Forum) are now no longer run by me for the 289 Register, but are now an extension of my other web sites (ironically, the same web sites that several of these jealous whingeing posters hate so intensely!). As such, I will not be told by you (or anyone else) to "piss off" from my own site !!

This non-constructive thread on this Forum is finally closed. The Forum is to revert to its original purpose - "to discuss and exchange information about 289 Cobras".

I have archived all of the postings in this thread at http://www.289register.com/criticismsupporte.html. Further comments can be added to this listing by e-mailing them to me.


Written by AWM at 26 Jul 2003 12:11:56: ( 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

What do you mean the thread is closed. It is not closed at all. This is the very proof of that. I am here posting to it.

YOU are the winging twat David. Take your silly little web site and stick it up your arse. Here is one member who will not be back and more importantly will not be renewing his membership of the register until it has been confirmed that you are no longer connected to it.

Am I meant to be impressed that you worked out how to add a posting onto this Forum? I would have been more impressed if you had understood that I didn't want any further postings on this subject on the Forum.

I haven't yet figured how to stick my web site up anyone's arse .... if you would like to demonstrate this feat to me first ....?
Am I supposed to be concerned that you will not be renewing your membership? If you had been running the web site for the last 4 1/2 years, and the Newsletter for the last 1 1/2 years, I think both I and many other members might be concerned, but based on your recent contribution, I don't think it will be much of a loss to the club .... and that is the best motivation to continue on the committee that I've had for almost a month !! In any case, when posting as Pat, you claimed that you were not a member !!


Written by AWM at 26 Jul 2003 12:18:36: ( 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

You need to re-read those posts again Davis because some of the ones you have in Blue are actually critical of you.

Perhaps you just can't acccept just how many people dislike you.

Go in a corner with a Lolipo David. It suits you - Child!

Oh BTW, this post needs to be coloured Red!

Hey, this started off as constructive criticism - many thanks !
BTW, it isn't important to me how many people like me or not - I am just trying to run an informative web site for the benefit of anyone that likes 289s. If you (or anyone else) doesn't like me (or the web site), this is YOUR problem, not mine, so I don't care !! I simply wish you all the best getting over it, and moving on to a less abusive and happier life.


Written by Pete at 27 Jul 2003 11:54:06: ( 81.77.88.38, user-38.bbd04tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

You're a winging baby David Butcher. Go find your dummy and stop sulking.

You're an ignorant arrogant little squirt with a severe attitude problem.

You're a prick.

We're all entitled to our opinions, but I wouldn't presume to make any such claims about you, since I don't know you - and I don't much care to, either. Unfortunately, you too seem unable to understand that I didn't want any further postings on this topic on the Forum. Would it help you if I added this request in German .... or French .... or Spanish .... or Italian .... or Swahili .... as well as in plain English ?


Written by Peter B at 29 Jul 2003 09:28:34: ( 81.77.169.228, user-484.bbd14tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

I think we need a new thread so how about this one on winging old twats. Lets talk about dummy throwers and sulkers like David Butcher.

Let's be honest there is nowt else going on here. The sulker has seen to that.


Written by David Butcher at 29 Jul 2003 10:32:04: ( 80.133.100.137, p50856489.dip0.t-ipconnect.de )

I'm amazed that your life is so sad and empty that you have nothing better to do !! If you spent this time working to earn a bit more money, perhaps you could soon afford to buy a 289 (or replica), and at least then you would understand why none of us are interested in your continual pathetic whingeing and abusive postings. I set up the Forum to be for and about 289s, not so that you may be able to wind up a few people enough to generate some responses - I'm sure that there are other sites out there that specialise in personal lonely-hearts correspondance, and these will be better suited to your needs.

This thread is also closed now. That does not mean that you cannot add any more postings - anyone can do that - just that further postings on irrelevant topics are not welcome. Have you finally understood that?


Written by Peter B at 29 Jul 2003 13:41:49: ( 81.77.169.228, user-484.bbd14tcl.dsl.pol.co.uk )

No my dear dummy throwing sulker, I do not understand. Please explain further.

Oh BTW, I already have a very nice replica 289 thank you.You should know, you've photographed it.

Lucky for you that it isn't a prerequisite to have even an average IQ level to qualify for ownership of a 289 then. As an owner of a 289, I would expect you to know better than to litter the 289 Register Forum with such stupidity - but if you haven't understood so far, I will certainly never be able to explain further to you.

Perhaps you could explain to me why the postings from "Peter B","Peter", "Pete", "John", "Anon for personal reasons", "Pat Moore", "Cobraman Clive" and "AWM" ALL originated from the same PC ? I think that it is pitiful that you found it necessary to post under eight different names, in a feeble attempt to make your personal argument against me look a little more convincing.

And why should I know that you have a 289 (or allegedly in Pat's case, two), just because I have photographed it? You are the one who wishes to remain anonymous, using eight different names on this Forum alone, and I have photographed close to 100 original and replica 289s, so that doesn't narrow the field down very much.

I had considered leaving your childish entries on the Forum - I was actually curious to see if anyone else is sad enough to follow up with further postings on your two threads (but further postings from you under these eight or further different names don't count !) - but then I decided to zap them after all. Believe me, the Forum IS CLOSED now to any further entries from "all eight" of you.

BTW - we're still waiting for you to come forward and take over the web site for the 289 Register, as you promised here to do !


So, since this entire farce was brought about by only two individuals who seem to have a personal grudge against me or the "289 Register", I decided earlier to give them enough rope to hang themselves before exposing their childish games here - and eagerly await their next response. Will they try to deny the evidence, or just revert to further abuse (I can see it already, no-one likes my smart arse up which I should stick my web site, whilst playing God, sulking and throwing dummies, crying and licking lollipops in the corner - what an exciting life I seem to lead, if only in the minds of two individuals with multiple personality disorders !!). But wait, I've placed a double-block to prevent them from adding any further entries onto the Forum - shame, now we'll never know what more they have to say !!

This subject is now closed, and I have put my name forwards to the other committee members to continue in my previous positions on the committee of the 289 Register - since I don't think that these two individuals with multiple personality disorders, whoever they are and whatever their motives, should be allowed to disrupt or harm the progress of the 289 Register any further.
It was immediately decided by all of the other committee members (that responded) that I should continue working on future editions of the Newsletter and on the 289 Register web site - which I have agreed to do, until such time as someone volunteers to replace me and take over these roles.

As an aside, I would like to bring to your attention the Vilfredo Pareto Principle - also known as the 80:20 Rule.
This was named after the Italian economist who observed in 1906 that 20% of the Italian population owned 80% of Italy's wealth. He then noticed that 20% of the pea pods in his garden accounted for 80% of his pea crop each year. Coincidence? Well, it got him thinking.
Vilfredo Pareto applied this insight - that most of the results of just about anything come from a minority of effort (or people, or input, etc.) - to pretty much everything, and we continue to do the same thing today.
In the case of the 289 Register, most of the required work to run the club, produce the Newsletter and Web Site, etc. is done by just three people, for a membership of about 130 (the 130:3 rule). This means that (if old Vilfredo was right) there are at least another 25 people out there just waiting to jump in and help out or take over - so please contact myself, or any other member of the committee, as soon as possible, to volunteer your support, expertise and services.
As regards contributions to the Newsletter, we have about 15 members who submit articles for inclusion, so there is still room for improvement here. Furthermore, I would suggest that almost every member has at least one article in them which would interest almost every other member, so why don't you start writing / typing now ?


dividing cylinder

Back

dividing cylinder

Page created on: July 25, 2003

Free JavaScripts provided
by The JavaScript Source

dividing cylinder