From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Wed Mar 27 12:46:55 2002
Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31])
by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2RCksR06433
for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:46:54 GMT
Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@agave [137.205.192.52])
by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2RCg6v21556;
Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:42:06 GMT
Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daemon@localhost [127.0.0.1])
by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g2RCcM0K025834
for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:38:22 GMT
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g2RCcMrs025833
for britdisc-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:38:22 GMT
Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30])
by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g2RCcL0K025828
for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:38:21 GMT
Received: from mailc.surrey.ac.uk (mailc.surrey.ac.uk [131.227.100.12])
by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g2RCcLn18786
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:38:21 GMT
Received: from ucs133 (actually host ucs133.surrey.ac.uk)
by mailc.surrey.ac.uk with SMTP Local (PP);
Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:38:05 +0000
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020327123804.00911da0@pop.surrey.ac.uk>
X-Sender: mu11mr@pop.surrey.ac.uk
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:38:04 +0000
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
From: mark richardson <mu11mr@surrey.ac.uk>
Subject:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
I am a relatively new player to the game (less than a year), so most of you
will probably tell me to bugger off and mind my own business, but I have a
couple of comments to add to the debate.
Firstly, many thanks to whoever posted the association proposal on
Britdisc, I found it very useful in clearing up most of the questions I
have heard being raised here over the past couple of weeks. If more of us
had found this information earlier, perhaps some of these heated
discussions could have been avoided, but that said, I wasnt around when the
changes were originally being discussed, so couldnt have had any idea where
to find this document.
One of the points raised in the proposal was about "Alienation of new
players". I think one key point not raised here is the use of Britdisc
itself. I dont know if Britdisc is always like this, but since I have been
receiving the information, there has been nothing but a long string of
people arguing and bitching like a bunch of old women (no offence intended
to female players!) about what should be done and what direction the game
should be going in. This does nothing to gain the confidence of new players
or to encourage them to become further involved with the sport. I believe
the bottom line is that you cant transform a sport and the way it is run
overnight, and arguing about the problems and lack of transparency is not
helping a great deal. If people believe the current committee is doing a
bad job, then with the one member one vote system, they will be voted out
next election. Until that time, surely we should give the committe any
opinions they ask for, but then leave them alone to get on with what they
are trying to do, improve the game we all love playing.
Sorry for the rant-like post, but everyone else was having a go and I felt
left out!!!
Mark Richardson
Slurrey Slingers