How the ADCA manipulates, another example

[chautauqua]

on Olga's Dexter chat site I happened to notice Carol Davidsons comment about the Talisman Award and had to laugh out loud. She is right on regarding what happened and why. I was there.....heading up the early Talisman selection committee. Here's the background. The Award was established to promote good public relations after all of the horrible back and forth communication after the big split. The sole idea, and I do mean sole idea, was to choose a member who promoted Dexters quietly and without fanfare in their Region. We were to find someone who worked within their Region promoting and going over and above helping fellow Region members with Dexter issues. Nothing more, nothing less. The receiver of the yearly award was to be featured in the Bulletin by an article featuring their farm and operation. PR. We got off to,a good start......Diane Mills-Frank was the first honoree, then Carol Davidson followed by Marcia Read. Good......no problem except one expected to be the first honoree but that is minor. After that, the decision was made that the impartial Committe wasn't capable of making a good enough choice WTf?? Here's where it went political.......the President and Board decided a Board member always had to be in on the final decision (in other words, make the selection) it was forever after out of the Committee's hands as to who got the award. What followed, completely out of line with the original purpose, was the Board selecting each other or an Officer in the following years. Several of us mentioned that selection wasn't on the right intent.....forget that. We proposed that as Board and Officers retired from those positions they be given an honorary award for their service and the Tailsman go back to it's original intent. Nope, never gonna happen. I can tell you that several people were nominated by the membership but never stood a chance. Judy was one, I was another. It's all secretive as to who is nominated, used to be published. So, don't take the Talisman seriously, it is nothing but slapping each other on the back for the past decade with more of the same to come. Today's lesson on how ADCA control works. 

[chautauqua]

Originally, the Committee was to gather information about the nominees accomplishments and talk to the Regional Director in the nominees area. That's what we did. Belle Hays did not want to be in on the decision making......she left it to the Committee to decide in good faith. No bio's were required, the Committee was suppose to do the research. My first Committee was Tom Gray from Minnesota, Starr Walkup from Missouri, I think another from Missouri, it's been awhile. We acted as fairly as we could with a few minor disagreements. The idea was to place the previous years winner on the Committee the following year.......meant to keep it member driven, Not Board driven. That's why, Gene, Marcia was on the year you were nominated. She told me she never got to decide anything. At the time too, in order to be transparent, we had all nominations sent to the Secretary, counted, noted and published. That went by the wayside too. The award is a mockery of the original intent............honoring the behind the scene member who promoted Dexters above and beyond but was NOT a Board or Officer. I am well aware that many of those people are great promoters and worked very hard, but the proper award should have been being acknowledged at the end of their term. You qualified, Gene as the original intent was meant to be.

[jamshundred]

Last year I nominated Mark and Marge Davis for the Talisman award.   It was the 50th year anniversary of the birth of their first calf,   ( FIFTY YEARS) and they still had Dexters on their farm in a year when Mr. Davis turned 87 and Marge was just a few years behind him.    ADCA IGNORED THIS NOMINATION!   It is typical of a leadership who now only recognizes themselves as worthy of any honor in this breed.   Mark and Marge Davis managed a feat not accomplished by any other breeder to date.  They preserved the largest number of the rarest bloodlines in the Dexter breed, in a closed herd, for a number of decades. . . .. and yet ADCA ignored that accomplishment.  That is NOT a leadership that value the breed or it's breeders.   They could not even use the excuse that Mark and Marge Davis stopped registering with ADCA. . . .  for they gave the Talisman award to the "Peerless Herd" and that herd left ADCA as well and has refused since 1988 to have anything to do with the association.   One can certainly understand that when the Logsden family members were involved in another nasty ADCA power struggle/ battle back in 1987, and some members of the board made vile accusations and threats against Kay Moore Baker, of the family of John Logsdon who all but saved the breed in the US. 

Judy

[chautauqua]

What a horrible way to treat long time accomplished breeders because of dirty controlling politics. Petty, get even politics at that. 

[Deleted]

I was at that AGM it was the first and last one I will ever go to. I knew of this nomination and was surprised when they were not even in the list of the nominated.

 

[cascade]

Ummmm, maybe you guys don't understand that the ADCA is just an organization of voting members who select fellow members to help run the organization. The people running the organization are just other members elected by the rest of us voting members. There is no evil conspiracy, just some fellow members doing the best they can in mostly volunteer jobs.... if you don't like it, then why don't you run for those difficult jobs? I know why you won't, it's because you want to whine about it, but aren't willing to roll up your sleeves and take those difficult positions yourselves.

[chautauqua]

Whining? This is an example of ADCA manipulation at it's best. Control. Did you understand that the original intent and purpose of the award was hijacked purely for political reasons? The award is handed out to the person the Board picks .......not the agreed upon awardee selected by the impartial Committee. Come on Kirk.......why do you always defend the ADCA? In your book they do no wrong but that's not the case. I could care less about any of their awards as I am sure most of us don't.........we know what we've accomplished over the years and how we've helped others. I've been on the Board, twice, I know how members are placed on Committees and then never asked to actually participate. All show and no go as the agenda is decided by insiders guarding self interest. You are naive to believe the ADCA is transparent or working for the good of all members. 

[cascade]

The ADCA is no different than any other club with members.... yes, we humans aren't perfect and we have all sorts of flaws. No matter who we elect to board positions in our clubs, we won't all agree with every decision they make. If I hate the decision my board representative makes, I can call them and give them my point of view. If think my board representative makes too many bad decisions, I can work to replace them... I can even work to get the position myself. That's how the very best member-driven organizations work.

[chautauqua]

Oh, Kirk.......you really believe that? Sometime I'll tell you an account of how nominations are rigged,er, I meant handled according to guidelines too. 

[jamshundred]

Cascade, if the "modern" leadership has not, in the dark of night, removed ALL your rights as a member. . . . .you would have had far more ability to have a say in that with which you disagree.  You are naive.    The only option YOU have in the present is IF they chose to give you an option.   All rules which gave you options for action are erased.  You are no longer a member of a club Kirk. . . . you could more aptly be described as a member of a cult. ..  .for you worship at the alter of a group over which you only think you have a voice.   You have a voice only on the occasions you are given permission to speak.  Just keep on giving them your money and do as you are told because you don't have any other option.