GOAL and the Outdoor Message - What the hell?

[Pilgrim]

Don't know where you got that list but it goes out to all affiliated clubs. Mine is one but is not listed in your list.

Here's the list:

http://www.goal.org/clubpages/affiliatedclubs.html

 

[economist]

I recall some option to opt out of paper delivery of the TOM at some point in the past, but that option doesn't seem to be available now, or at least is not advertised. Wasn't there some email we all got offering an opt out last year? I haven't heard about it since.

 

[EddieCoyle]

It goes out to 23 clubs and the members of GOAL as well as the members of the Rhode Island State Rifle & Revolver Association

This is the list from their website...

I didn't look on the website. I counted the clubs that were in the paper. Whether it's 19 or 23, that's still a small fraction of the overall and affiliated clubs in Mass.

Don't know where you got that list but it goes out to all affiliated clubs. Mine is one but is not listed in your list.

Here's the list:

http://www.goal.org/clubpages/affiliatedclubs.html

I was referring to the clubs that subscribe and have their newsletters in TOM.

 

[ChargingCharlie]

Don't know where you got that list but it goes out to all affiliated clubs. Mine is one but is not listed in your list.

Here's the list:

http://www.goal.org/clubpages/affiliatedclubs.html

I'm a moron...The list I posted was a list of the clubs that post listings in TOM...not the list of clubs that receive them.

 

[mark056]

To those who have wondered why GOAL has not replied to this thread, I have received the following communication from GOAL, this in response to a private inquiry I made regarding this issue:

"Since there was an official inquiry made to the Board of Directors the GOAL staff can not comment."

 

[EddieCoyle]

I'm a moron...The list I posted was a list of the clubs that post listings in TOM...not the list of clubs that receive them.

I misunderstood you.

When a club pays to get its newsletter in TOM, each member of the club gets a copy. This is what I thought you meant. My club does this. It's expensive, but not as expensive as doing a newsletter on our own.

An affiliated club gets one copy sent to the club. I'm not sure how many people that reaches. If it's like all the other stuff at my club, it gets put up on the front table where nobody looks at it, and then gets thrown out when the pile falls over.

 

[dwarven1]

What would the point of attending ANOTHER meeting be when they haven't answered my questions the first time I raised them or on the 5 times I followed up with them via email?

Who's turning on GOAL? I'm asking a question - I'm not allowed to ask a question without being 'disloyal'? Herr grupenfuerer, I am sorry for doubting der party line! I vill shut up now und be a gut little footsoldier.

Gee Ross, for a guy that's always spouting off about 1775, you're not sounding very revolutionary.

To answer your points in order:
Because they may not have HAD the answers at last month's meetings. It's entirely possible that whoever you asked the question of needed time to dig into whatever documentation they have. I don't know who you've emailed so I can't answer the second question.

And where did I say you were being "disloyal", Bob? Or did you not understand that I was pointing out that perhaps airing dirty laundry (if, indeed, it IS dirty laundry!) in public just weakens any pull they may have on Beacon Hill?

 

[economist]

To answer your points in order:
Because they may not have HAD the answers at last month's meetings. It's entirely possible that whoever you asked the question of needed time to dig into whatever documentation they have. I don't know who you've emailed so I can't answer the second question.

And where did I say you were being "disloyal", Bob? Or did you not understand that I was pointing out that perhaps airing dirty laundry (if, indeed, it IS dirty laundry!) in public just weakens any pull they may have on Beacon Hill?

Are ****ing kidding? They don't know, immediately, where $90K+ in money goes or why it goes there? And you want people to be quiet about this so GOAL can influence Beacon Hill? How can you criticize a man for airing the truth while you apparently want to support what could well be hidden corruption?

 

[Palladin]

This sounds like the complaints that I hear at [insert name here] Gun Club from the people that don't come to meetings about how the place is run. (Beleive me, I've been on the recieving end with our switch to non-tox shot....and from non-members as well!)

Is GOAL perfect - hell no! Could there be more transparency? Hell, yes! But it serves no purpose for GOAL (or any other org) to make its business known out-of-house when not required. If you've never atteneded a GOAL annual meeting (as I've not) then you have no right to complain. QUestion, yes, but not complain. And I'd posit that this open forum is not the ideal venue for the nitty-gritty details of GOAL to be aired.

As for the OM charging clubs to do their newsletters (my club is in there)....if it's too expensive, then do it in house. What? Nobody is stepping forward to do it for the monthy fee that GOAL charges? Wow....color me shocked.

GOAL may not be perfect ( just as the NRA is not perfect) but they do more good than harm, and they do more for us than we can do individually. Perhaps one of the people that is dissatisfied with the GOAL Board of Directors should run for a seat, and use NES as a place to start the campaign....?

See http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb....A.L.-Board-of-Directors?highlight=goal+board

I ran, along with five other individuals from NES, and will run again this year. As a life member, I require transparency in any organization, especially one so prominent in gun rights issues. We don't need to be providing the anti's with ammo.

 

[cekim]

And where did I say you were being "disloyal", Bob? Or did you not understand that I was pointing out that perhaps airing dirty laundry (if, indeed, it IS dirty laundry!) in public just weakens any pull they may have on Beacon Hill?

I don't know about you, but "not getting caught" was not the ethical standard to which I was held growing up, nor how I live as an adult. It appears from the contents of this thread that there is easily searchable info on ma.gov that raises serious questions - if we can find it, so can they.

 

[jarhead66]

A lot of people on this thread have been talking about going back to 1976 when things started. I have been fighting this fight since 1968 when they stopped us from buying guns through the mail and created all this FFL nonsense.

In those days there was no means of communication, only rumors and hearsay. And any rumor Beacon Hill heard that they liked, soon became a law. My older cousin was a cop and he tried to tell me that a license for a handgun was good for one gun at a time. You couldn't even move them to a new address at the same time. I told him his opinion was not a law and it caused a rift between us until the day he died.

We need a source of communication. Maybe in this day and age I'm a little antiquated and an electronic issue would be better. I don't know. I do know that to go back to the days of no newsletter or communication will be the death nell of your rights as you know them.

A lot of people say that Mike Dukakis was an anti gun governor. I may be wrong, but, I don't think he ever signed an anti gun bill, he knew better. He used to rattle his saber at news conferences, but I don't think he signed any bills. He knew that if he did, the state house would be surrounded the next day with protesters. Communication!!

Ed King was the last good governor we had. May he rest in peace. Mike Yacino and Ron Ricci worked with Ed King to get the IHMSA international championships held here in Massachusetts at Camp Curtis Guild in North Reading. They actually got the laws relaxed for the duration of the contest and people from all over came here and shot handguns. I had the honor of winning one of the standing categories and will never forget the spectacle of the event.

Without communication this would never have happened. And even with it, will probably never happen again.

Those that don't study history are doomed to repeat it. Divide and conquer is the liberals battle plan, don't be a sucker.

 

[Bob P]

To answer your points in order:
Because they may not have HAD the answers at last month's meetings. It's entirely possible that whoever you asked the question of needed time to dig into whatever documentation they have. I don't know who you've emailed so I can't answer the second question.

And where did I say you were being "disloyal", Bob? Or did you not understand that I was pointing out that perhaps airing dirty laundry (if, indeed, it IS dirty laundry!) in public just weakens any pull they may have on Beacon Hill?

Ross

I tried doing this on the quiet. I was not given an answer. I was not given a timeframe when I could receive an answer, I was not given any indication an answer was forthcoming (and I DID specifically ask that question) and, finally, I was referred to GOAL's atty.

So since I wasn't getting an answer from GOAL's BOD, I asked here, thinking that maybe someone might know something more about this than I.

As to Beacon Hill, if a dumb ass like me can figure this out, I'm sure someone up there could put two and two together. Better we clean our own house.

 

[KMS]

Seems that 90k could go towards alot of Goal orginized events.

 

[Bob P]

So, who's called GOAL? If not, why not?

 

[drgrant]

1 - I'm sure they know about it.
2 - Why did this suddenly become SO urgent that you couldn't attend the next BOD meeting and ask again?
3 - I'm sure that GOAL is thrilled at all the support they're getting in this thread.
4 - I'm sure that all gun-banners on Bacon Hill are even more thrilled that GOAL's own members are turning on their own organization.

I think Bob is just concerned about where his dues are going. Is that not a legitimate concern?

I don't see him marching around with a sign saying "Don't renew! they're ripping us off!!!" . He just has questions, and he wants some answers... this isn't a GOAL roast.

-Mike

 

[Dench]

I don't see him marching around with a sign saying "Don't renew! they're ripping us off!!!" . He just has questions, and he wants some answers... this isn't a GOAL roast.

-Mike

I dont think that needs to be said. I'm sure a lot of people, myself included are already thinking that.

 

[economist]

Some of you folks keep telling stories from the '70s and saying that you like paper publications.

Does that mean you favor the GOAL board funneling money to an individual in a manner apart from its mission? Because that may be what is happening here. Until the board clears the air we don't know. All we know right now is that there are some seriously incestuous financial relationships at the top of GOAL.

If I were on the board, I would start by detailing all payments made to board members, their families, past officers or directors, and other related parties. Right now we know about the Outdoor Message transaction, at least in part. What don't we know?

 

[JoseyWales]

Seems that 90k could go towards alot of Goal orginized events.

Or a nice pro 2A billboard on a major highway.

That Outdoor Message paper is sent to pro gun people. If you think about it, 90k is being spent on preaching to the choir. If instead we put it towards a pro-gun billboard, it may be better spent convincing people that guns are not bad

 

[Chris]

I can not and will not speak for the board. But I can fill in some holes

The request for information was given to several BOD members to create a report. Our next meeting is August 11. Until the report is presented and approved it will not be released. BOD meetings are quarterly with special meetings called as needed and I attend several committee meetings depending on need. Feel free to call the office and find out when the next one is. As a member you are welcome.

I was present when Mike was asked about the OM and frankly without getting into details I can not talk about as the report is not finalized, most of the concerns voiced here are unfounded. Other issues are sure to be discussed. Print and mail are not cheap. Perhaps a better/hybrid distribution is possible. I'm sure that discussion will be interesting.

Regardless what is preferred by this community, most members do not have or regularly use electronic access. Let's face it, two well qualified NES members ran for the BOD last year and did not make it. This might be a very vocal group but does not represent the majority of the members. I get frustrated at times too as there are things I'd love to see GOAL do but resources are not unlimited.

Also please note that the OM is used far beyond member distribution as a tool to promote the organization. Jon and other instructors provide them to students to help increase membership. Most people are not aware of the variety of things going on in the state.

The calendar at the back is exclusive and was specifically set aside for members and can not be accessed on-line. Just about everything else can be found on-line as we made a decision not to do a members only section. We have nothing to hide.

You might not like Mike, but he's the one that recently came up with donors to help fund a junior rifle program. He's the one that becomes personal friends with the lawmakers who are on our side. Yes he is passionate but he will always put his ass on the line in support of his convictions. He makes a few bucks off GOAL by doing things associated with the organization but he is also looking out for the organization too. He recently reorganized the BOD minutes from the beginning and verified that things voted actually were in place. Anyone here want to volunteer 6 months reading minutes and cross referencing with policy? Why did he do this? To be sure we were in compliance and funds were being distributed properly. Mike is also the one that makes sure the Conservation Camp runs each summer. Although the GOAL Foundation runs it, it is really Mike that makes it happen.

Now, instead of bitching on an open forum with no clue what you are talking about - exercise your membership right and attend a BOD meeting. We almost never have anyone attend.

I'll leave it at that - just got word my mom is in the hospital. So if I don't follow up in a timely manner you know why.

 

[Bob P]

Thank you Chris. That's more of an answer than I've received to date. I'm sorry about your mom. I'll add a prayer.

 

[MassMark]

Chris - first: Good luck with your mom - I hope everything turns out well for her...

Second: Why could not this have been communicated to Bob, who has been in steady contact with GOAL? Why the blow off?

Third: I think that people's concerns about where members money is spent is legitimate. Raising those concerns may be "bitching" to some, but to many it's a demand for clarity - something that GOAL should not only be concerned with, but participate in the discussion of....

 

[yanici]

Chris - first: Good luck with your mom - I hope everything turns out well for her...

Second: Why could not this have been communicated to Bob, who has been in steady contact with GOAL? Why the blow off?

Third: I think that people's concerns about where members money is spent is legitimate. Raising those concerns may be "bitching" to some, but to many it's a demand for clarity - something that GOAL should not only be concerned with, but participate in the discussion of....

All of the above, especially wishing for the best for your Mom.

Many of GOAL members cannot make the BOD meetings. This Forum has let the BOD and GOAL know that maybe it is time to reflect upon whether it is dollar wise to pay to publish in the OM. Bang for the buck should be the deciding factor.

 

[economist]

Any organization that requires attendance at a board meeting to provide transparency and clarity deserves to have its members limited to people who attend board meetings.

 

[jar]

FYI, I emailed GOAL asking if I can opt out of the message and if that would save GOAL money. They said yes to the former and referred me to the BOD for the latter.

 

[ChargingCharlie]

Any organization that requires attendance at a board meeting to provide transparency and clarity deserves to have its members limited to people who attend board meetings.

Ummm, yeah...I don't think he said it was required. He just said that almost nobody attends the meetings and suggested that if you had a gripe to try to show up at one. I swear that some of you have a "get out the pitchfork and torch" setting that is faulty.

 

[mark056]

Any organization that requires attendance at a board meeting to provide transparency and clarity deserves to have its members limited to people who attend board meetings.

I'm afraid that I don't understand your point here. Any organization that has an "open meeting" policy should have nothing to hide. If a person has a burning desire to attend a board meeting, usually there will be a way to make that happen as it is a matter of priorities.

There are far too many organizations that have closed meeting policies and I frequently wonder why.

My experience with organizations other than GOAL when I have been on boards is that there are plenty of people who gripe and complain, but when asked why they don't bother to attend open board meetings, or at least articulate their concerns formally, they suddenly have higher priorities and rapidly lose interest about attending meetings and all of the sudden the board members are the bad guys because they don't respond informally to someone's concerns. That's why we have organizations with structure.

I can't comment on the current state of affairs with regard to GOAL and this particular issue, but let's see how the BOD does respond, and in the meantime, those who have concerns should contact the BOD with them. In the context of my experience writing is the best because then the writer has an audit trail or an in-person presentation to the BOD that is incorporated into the minutes whereas a phone call becomes a "he said, she said."

 

[MassMark]

Any organization that requires attendance at a board meeting to provide transparency and clarity deserves to have its members limited to people who attend board meetings.

This. Again - GOAL makes more than adequate and timely use of NES for advertising/message launching and for Jim to chastise us and question our dedication to the Constitution for not attending a cocktail party, but rarely answers concerns of it's members here. Understanding about the BoD and the secret report process stated by Chris, it still does not speak as to why members must attend board meeting or make a phone call to express concerns. GOAL can't have it both ways...Either accept the nuances of the electronic age and the questions/concerns that come with it, or withdraw into the shadow of the printing press room, crank out newspapers and breathe easy that no one is questioning anything.....

 

[economist]

I'm afraid that I don't understand your point here. Any organization that has an "open meeting" policy should have nothing to hide. If a person has a burning desire to attend a board meeting, usually there will be a way to make that happen as it is a matter of priorities.

There are far too many organizations that have closed meeting policies and I frequently wonder why.

My experience with organizations other than GOAL when I have been on boards is that there are plenty of people who gripe and complain, but when asked why they don't bother to attend open board meetings, or at least articulate their concerns formally, they suddenly have higher priorities and rapidly lose interest about attending meetings and all of the sudden the board members are the bad guys because they don't respond informally to someone's concerns. That's why we have organizations with structure.

I can't comment on the current state of affairs with regard to GOAL and this particular issue, but let's see how the BOD does respond, and in the meantime, those who have concerns should contact the BOD with them. In the context of my experience writing is the best because then the writer has an audit trail whereas a phone call becomes a "he said, she said."

My point is that a properly run member organization in the year 2011 should be readily understood by anyone anywhere. Clear financial reports should be public. Related party transactions in particular should be transparent and clearly explained. If the organization dictates a policy of hiding the ball from all but those who attend board meetings, then it is best that members be limited to those who plan to attend meetings.

I don't plan to attend meetings.

 

[richc]

Ummm, yeah...I don't think he said it was required. He just said that almost nobody attends the meetings and suggested that if you had a gripe to try to show up at one. I swear that some of you have a "get out the pitchfork and torch" setting that is faulty.

Bob P did exactly that and did not receive an answer to the issue he raised. I do believe it took the pitchford and torch approach to get ANY response from GOAL's BOD.

 

[Bob P]

I get frustrated at times too as there are things I'd love to see GOAL do but resources are not unlimited.

Then bring the news letter in house, sell ad space, make it available at a 'news stand price' for non members and use the revenue for GOAL and not a private company.

He makes a few bucks off GOAL by doing things associated with the organization but he is also looking out for the organization too.

Then let him draw a salary. Right now no one has a clue how much is 'a few bucks' is. No one is begrudging someone being compensated for their time, but you're either a volunteer or a salaried employee or an independent contractor - and there're rules about the employment of the latter that need to be followed.

We're looking for some transparency.