We have received a response to our formal
grievance
(A Moderation Mess).
I can't verify this by having a look in the minutes
(The Saga of the Minutes),
but we will take it that the response reflects MFS Committee handling
of the grievance under the grievance policy.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and
quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. Based on our test
drive, the society's grievance policy is a sham. Maybe it was
designed to be used against members, and not by members against
decisions of MFS Committee, who can say.
The MFS Committee's response to my grievance
against them, was to say that they have reviewed their own decision
and decided it was correct. Well, they would, wouldn't they?
They restated their unsubstantiated story of
complaints about my postings to MFS announce (and presumably no
complaints about others who are allowed to use MFS Announce without
problems).
This committee appears totally unaware of the
rules of natural justice referred to in the Associations
Incorporation Act. Everyone is entitled to a fair and independent
hearing, and to confront their accusers. What are these contrived
complaints and who is said to have made them? Where is the
independent panel to decide on my complaint of MFS Committee abuse of
power for vindictive purposes? Is the panel really the MFS Committee
itself? If so, the grievance process is a sham.
Their second reason for deciding their own
decision was correct was that they don't like me expressing my
opinion on my blog. This is even more indefensible, messing up my use
of MFS Announce as revenge for me writing this blog. It appears to me
to be an abuse of power.
Again, they quote complaints about this blog that
they allege they have received, with no substantiation. I have heard
no complaints from others outside the MFS Committee about either my
use of MFS Announce or my blog. I have had some comments published on
my blog disagreeing with this or that that I wrote but none recently
in spite of high readership numbers. I encourage polite comments and
contrary views on my blog, in the interests of open discussion.
The MFS Committee call sending out event
announcements with reminders closer to the time "overloading".
Again a baseless complaint obviously contrived to convince themselves
they are right, and a statistical count of announcements shows that
we are very low on overall message count, and about in the middle for
number of reminders per event. Folks with busy lives like a reminder
a few days before the event.
They also state as a reason "The announce
list is for information of events, not for baseless accusations".
Who could disagree, but talk about setting up a straw man and then
knocking it down, this reason is the most baseless I have ever seen.
I requested access to the list of who is moderated
and who is not, under Rule 40 (The records, books and other documents
of the society shall be open to inspection). I received a general answer
that did not provide the list.
The MFS Committee have moved the date of the AGM
to a week later this year, to a date that is when we will be away at
the Bush Dancers Bendigo Bivouac. So, I leave it to those who are in
town to think about the problems that lie behind this mess, and to
realise that the best solution is a brand new committee of ten. What
are you going to do?
Regards
Lance