lol Derek...but the difference is that the hypothetical company is not in the business of representing lots of people...but then I guess TFP isn't either..just their egos...ok I will concede on your hypothetical.
lol Derek...but the difference is that the hypothetical company is not in the business of representing lots of people...but then I guess TFP isn't either..just their egos...ok I will concede on your hypothetical.
..................Originally Posted by PinHead
Sounds like the mad Yank who waves his signs at motorists down at Capalaba.
Nearly took his head off with a hedge trimmer one day.
He moved.
thats just plain bad luck, business is business. i doubt if there are too many businesses out there that did not get a start by poaching a couple of customers from where they were working before starting out on their own.
I am watching one unfold at the moment, where the business owners are basically gouging big time because they think they cannot lose a particular multi national client, boy are they in for a big surprise, all the eggs in one basket, ripping the client off, offending the client to the point of company not wanting to deal with them.........all because they think they can.
Nice Hypothetical Derek except
"Bob Smith starts TFP and in so doing sets up a branch in Queensland;" Bob Smith had nothing to do with setting up a Branch of TFP in Queensland.
"an executive is put in place" Bob Smith did not put anybody in place within the Qld branch of TFP
"there is disagreement between the Queensland executive and Bob;" this bit you got right
"Queensland go off and start their own party; in so doing they take with them most of Bob's Queensland branch members;" Not sure how they are Bob's members as he didn't have anything to do with them anyway.
Interesting hypothetical Derek!! To answer your question maybe we should have a look at our own political history for precedence. And by the way this is not preempting any legal argument either side may make - I'm just drawing a parallel.But Greg, what if .... and yep, I normally hate what ifs, ...... but what if Bob Smith and The Fishing Party are legally right in what they are trying to do.
THIS IS ALL HYPOTHETICAL .......... BUT
Look at it this way ......... someone spends years building up a business; the business expands and goes interstate; a director is put in charge of the interstate branch; there is a disagreement between this director and head office; he gets pissed off and goes and starts his own business; in doing so he takes most of their staff and most of their customers; shouldn't the company fight to get that business back?
Heres the analogy ............. Bob Smith starts TFP and in so doing sets up a branch in Queensland; an executive is put in place; there is disagreement between the Queensland executive and Bob; Queensland go off and start their own party; in so doing they take with them most of Bob's Queensland branch members; before he can do much about it the election is on and they are also trying to take with them Bob's Queensland voters; shouldn't Bob fight to get them back.
A political Party called the Democratic Labor Party existed from 1955-1978 (not related except by name to the current DLP).
The old DLP came about as a split off from the Labor party, like the TFP split, the DLP split resulted from disagreements within the leadership of the Labor Party. The catholic lead arm of the ALP was becoming alarmed at what they saw as the takover of the ALP by socialist/communist groups (the red under the bed type syndrome) so to cut a long story short some were expelled (against the party constitution) and some simply crossed the floor.
The big difference between the DLP/ALP split and the TFP and AFLP split was that serving members of the parliament were the ones that split and formed two separate parties which effectively voted against each other in Parliament.
Now if anyone had a cause to spit the dummy and claim DLP members as their own, it was the ALP. Their members were voted in as ALP members – not DLP, they had an obligation to stick it out in parliament to represent their constituencies as ALP members, but they didn’t.
Does this make it right? I don’t know my memory doesn’t serve me very well in the years before I was born, I have only read the history.
The point is the ALP didn’t fight the DLP in courts, they fought them at the ballot box where all political fights should be, they fought for share of mind and heart via their politics, not share of membership in the courts.
Now I suppose that there was bitterness between the protagonists and indeed they were probably justified. But from what I have read, the ALP took the view point that any member that defected wasn’t a member that they really wanted.
Before anyone says – well that was many years ago and that doesn’t apply now – they were still controlled by the same Electoral Act of 1918.
Anyway, my point is history shows us that this is not an uncommon occurrence, what is uncommon is for one party to threaten the outcome of a federal election due to a dispute regarding membership who don’t want to be part of the original organisation. At the very least no party has ever succeeded in overturning an entire election and having the votes redistributed back to themselves in the process.
Cheers,
Adam
Ahhhhhhh but it's all hypothetical.
It appears no spokeperson from TFP has any comment to make on here regarding this. If I was in that position I would be making a statement rather quickly.
Shane must be very proud of the party he has aligned himself with
He should of stuck with running as an independant
A Proud Member of
"The Rebel Alliance"
Sounds like a whole bunch of BS to me from both sides. ANd these are the people who want to help govern this great country of ours??????????????????????????
None of them will get my vote if thats how they carry on.
Mike
Steady up there Tim, I am one of the 'cronies' you are referring to and your inference is WRONG.
Shane Boese was the chairperson of the South Brisbane Branch of TFPQ and I was involved with that executive for about 12 months, including a major effort at the last State election. Shane did a great job promoting the interests of fishers in SEQ, in fact such a great job that he got more publicity than KC and KC put a stop to it by saying he was the only authorised spokesperson. A few other things happened, and a rift opened up between Shane and KC.
That together with the rift between KC and Bob Smith led to the formation of the AFLP as a breakaway party. Just remember that there are probably personal agendas and most definitely egos in both camps.
That is about all I know about the situation between TFP and AFLP. I think it is a bloody shame that two groups fighting for the same cause have to fight each other as well. I respect KC and the job he is doing and I have nothing against the AFLP myself.
Lets leave the bickering a and fighting to KC and Bob Smith and Shane. It has nothing to do with anyone else IMHO, and participating in it only damages both groups further, at a time when both groups need the best possible public image and all the support they can get.
Jeremy
"The underlying spirit of angling is that the skill of the angler is pitted against the instinct and strength of the fish and the latter is entitled to an even chance for it's life."
(Quotation from the rules of the Tuna Club Avalon, Santa Catalina, U.S.A.)
Apathy is the enemy
all too true derek, i'm hearing what you are saying. but what if this fight were to destroy not only the hypothetical "business" you were referring to but the pastime of all of it's employees AND customers. would this be ok in your books?
this would be the next question 'mr robinson' would be asking, i used to love that show, he's an extremely clever man.
I can't say if it is right or wrong because it's all hypothetical.
Hoever if it wasn't hypothetical I would say that with better management practices and in the best interest of all stakeholders it maybe should never have happened.
Its kind of interesting that Bob the breaker never seems to come onto ausfish
Maybe he doesn't need to considering all the sh** stirring Derek is doing of late. His latest thread is a doozy IMHO.
Rec fishing needs this like a hole in the head - again IMHO that is.
Cheers - Lou
Timber lures - just bung 'em in the water mate & hang on !!!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote