Admin DavidOwen Posted 27 January , 2020 Admin Share Posted 27 January , 2020 7 minutes ago, keithmroberts said: Gareth and Hedley I'm no longer a mod, but you are both trying to get some serious thoughts out here. Please, the thread would be better for cooler and less emotive words, however well intentioned. Keith I agree with Keith's sentiments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedley Malloch Posted 27 January , 2020 Share Posted 27 January , 2020 Gareth - if you are not 'representing' the WFA in some capacity, then what are you doing here? You seem to be much more than an interested bystander. And the point about 'heads and parapets' is that they invite either shots or constructive criticism, depending upon which side of the parapet one is located. Having said that, I withdraw from this thread. The question for me now, is whether I also withdraw from the WFA. Probably ... . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o j kirby Posted 27 January , 2020 Share Posted 27 January , 2020 O.K., so there is a debate about the relevance and future of the WFA. I have been a member since I was at school. I read articles that the usual history books may never carry. I see the work of the amateur historian who delves into detail that has been inspiring and if ever obsessive, certainly adds to our knowledge of events, locations and individuals. If the WFA disappeared, what would fill the gap? No society will ever satisfy all who are members, and whatever our own specific WW1 interest may be, there are always openings to learn about aspects of the period that hitherto may have evaded our attentions. I have gained a lot of knowledge through my membership, and proud to be a part of it. Cheers, Owain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 27 January , 2020 Author Share Posted 27 January , 2020 30 minutes ago, Hedley Malloch said: Gareth - if you are not 'representing' the WFA in some capacity, then what are you doing here? You seem to be much more than an interested bystander. And the point about 'heads and parapets' is that they invite either shots or constructive criticism, depending upon which side of the parapet one is located. Having said that, I withdraw from this thread. The question for me now, is whether I also withdraw from the WFA. Probably ... . @Hedley Malloch I have explained several times what I am "doing here". The opening line of post #1 says what I am "doing here". I am most definitely much more than an "interested bystander". But none of that means that I am in any way representing the WFA in any capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gardenerbill Posted 27 January , 2020 Share Posted 27 January , 2020 Gareth, do you think it is time to summarise the genuine feedback you have received then shut down the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 27 January , 2020 Author Share Posted 27 January , 2020 I have already summarised it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gardenerbill Posted 27 January , 2020 Share Posted 27 January , 2020 11 minutes ago, Gareth Davies said: I have already summarised it. Haven't followed this closely for a while, what is the topic number of your summary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 27 January , 2020 Author Share Posted 27 January , 2020 60. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gardenerbill Posted 27 January , 2020 Share Posted 27 January , 2020 Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 27 January , 2020 Share Posted 27 January , 2020 Just something that has struck me: whilst I have no view on the Bulletin (though, if pushed, I tend to agree with Muerrisch/Grumpy/David), I would be loath to see Stand To! going digital. Reading a daily newspaper on-line works for me, but reading a magazine (and viewing photographs included) on a phone wouldn't work for me. Keep the magazine in print format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 27 January , 2020 Author Share Posted 27 January , 2020 Do you read Trenchlines? Does anyone read Trenchlines? I haven't seen any comments on it which could mean that it is widely liked. But then again...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 27 January , 2020 Author Share Posted 27 January , 2020 Going back to Steven's post on Stand To!, I don't think anyone is suggesting that it should be a digital only product. I think that there is a view by many that it needs to change a little (maybe a different font and layout) but in general it does exactly what it is trying to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knotty Posted 27 January , 2020 Share Posted 27 January , 2020 Gareth, You mentioned Trenchlines, correct me if I’m wrong but I have not seen a copy since the September posting, is it still produced ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 27 January , 2020 Author Share Posted 27 January , 2020 Hmm. Don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter 1914 Posted 28 January , 2020 Share Posted 28 January , 2020 There have been several excellent editions of Trenchlines since September. 15 hours ago, Gareth Davies said: I most certainly have not put myself forward as the WFA rep. As for “you people “, the fact that you are not used to it is irrelevant. I’m not used to lots of things that happen on here but me not being used to someone doesn’t strike me as a valid criterion for criticism. For the absence of doubt I do NOT represent the WFA. I am just a simple member who cares about the WFA and, rather than snipe from the sidelines I have decided to try and make a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 28 January , 2020 Author Share Posted 28 January , 2020 Thank you Peter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knotty Posted 28 January , 2020 Share Posted 28 January , 2020 6 hours ago, Peter 1914 said: There have been several excellent editions of Trenchlines since September. Thanks Peter/Gareth, I have found them. Let’s put it down to admin error. Most come with Trenchlines heading, and auto filed in appropriate place, if it says otherwise it goes to WFA misc., where I did not think to look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Murray Posted 28 January , 2020 Share Posted 28 January , 2020 On 26/01/2020 at 21:08, Muerrisch said: Ann, thank you. perhaps my background, not in academe, prompted my response. I entered the Meteorological Office of the Ministry of Defence at eighteen, with a A Levels in Physics, Pure Maths and Applied Maths. I qualified as a computer programmer in 1960, as a weather forecaster, as a Lecturer to RAF aircrew and in the Met. Office College,.I ended up as Chief Met Officer, British Forces Germany with a Dormant Commission as Group Captain RAF. Non-academic work in demanding environments with demanding customers . All of which leaves me Grumpy, whether it be in German or English. I fear that you have not addressed specifics, such as my questions above, namely: What do you think is in the Bulletin that could not, with advantage, be added to ST!, assuming an extra ST! per annum? Can you give recent examples which demand exposure in a Bulletin, rather than in a section of an enlarged ST ? Muerrisch, I can promise you I didn't much excel at Maths! You have a very interesting career profile for sure and it goes without saying you must have a lot of insight to military history. I started in fine art and switched to art history and ended up specialising in war art. Re. bulletin, these are good questions - I hope someone in the WFA EC might be reading these posts as they would definitely be in a better position than me (in that they'd have better insight to the varied needs and preferences of members). I'm going to reserve my thoughts though, as it would really only be my perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Murray Posted 28 January , 2020 Share Posted 28 January , 2020 On 27/01/2020 at 08:45, Chris_Baker said: It is often said that the real strength of the Association lies in its branches. Yet the condundrum remains that it is not necessary to be a member of the Association to attend a branch meeting and to enjoy the benefits of the networking that you describe. Yep, that's true too. Though I like to get Stand To! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Murray Posted 28 January , 2020 Share Posted 28 January , 2020 On 27/01/2020 at 08:42, John(txic) said: Buelligan, thank you, I appreciate it. I'm new here and just wanted to express my own perception of the WFA. But as I was recently reminded, it's easier to start a row than keep the peace! John(txic), No, academe is not a good model. A lot of younger scholars are driven away due to nastiness and one-upmanship that happens at conferences. That said, it's a necessary evil in my research area and some people, thankfully, are supportive. I haven't found it that friendly up here either, though. This is my last post in this thread, for that very reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 8 April , 2020 Share Posted 8 April , 2020 The new WFA Bulletin, arrived yesterday, has excellent articles that would be better in a larger Stand To!. The B d W gets scarcely a mention, and no thanks at all to the Working Group. Plus ca change ................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barkalotloudly Posted 10 April , 2020 Share Posted 10 April , 2020 Received my copy of the Bulletin in which it is outlined the project to identify? all casualties who served under a different name, The original and {only?} set of hand typed registers I have in my possession have {by regiment} all casualties, service numbers where they are buried / on which memorial they are commemorated etc it also records the names and notes the different names under which they served I did offer this resource to the WFA but was rejected ? oh well onwards and upwards Incidentially I have had reason on 2/3 occasions to write to the various chairmen of my local branch offering information etc but have not even had an acknowledgement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter 1914 Posted 14 April , 2020 Share Posted 14 April , 2020 Not sure who you approached at the WFA but I would try again by contacting David Tattersfield, the Development Trustee. He is an excellent guy and was the driving force behind the digitalisation of the pension records. I think he has a particular interest in this “served as” project and I’m sure he will appreciate helpful information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 14 April , 2020 Share Posted 14 April , 2020 6 minutes ago, Peter 1914 said: Not sure who you approached at the WFA but I would try again by contacting David Tattersfield, the Development Trustee. He is an excellent guy and was the driving force behind the digitalisation of the pension records. I think he has a particular interest in this “served as” project and I’m sure he will appreciate helpful information. Peter, I don't have a dog in this particular fight, but what emerges time and time and time again is a picture of institutional discourtesy, partly ameliorated by a few good guys like Jon Cooksey. Good administration is the bedrock of a thriving organisation. Bad administration withers enthusiasm and initiative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 22 April , 2020 Author Share Posted 22 April , 2020 Has anyone had a look at the WFA's annual financial report? I would have posted something as soon as my copy arrived but I was banned for a month but I did put some comments on Twitter. Sadly I can't find them because of this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts