POL versus Royal Bank Of Scotland

bellybabe · Post by **bellybabe** » 02 Sep 2005, 08:32

Porty wrote: BB, I cannot let this statement go without drawing attention to a rare display of ignorance from your good self:

Bellybabe wrote: MPeople might be considered unethical by people who believe in the right to own property at a price one can afford, rather than paying huge loans for the privelege.
Mpeople do not buy or sell properties and have no influence on the price of property or on the price of the money that buys that property. You are talking out of your bahookey.

No, you misunderstand my point. I meant the whole idea of mortgages - borrowing a vast amount of money for the right to own property....twenty five years or so later. I said nothing about you buying or selling property, nor about you influencing prices. Simply that your business is a part of a financial system that means people have to spend a long time in debt.

I also said it might be considered unethical by some people. I made no personal statement about it. I was not displaying ignorance.

BB

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 02 Sep 2005, 08:42

But your statement made specific reference to the price of property and people who cannot afford property, what has that got to do with MPeople and its sphere of influence.

Would you have taken Tesco's money?

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 02 Sep 2005, 08:54

Dakota wrote:
foxy wrote:
As far as running the forum is concerned, there is no way I want a say in the decision making...it has to be done by the small but capable group of volunteers who put themselves forward.
Too true! Thank you Mods - and thank you to the whole fundraising team. I hope this thread is taken as healthy debate, rather than personal attacks. For the record, I bank with RBS and have recommended them to friends.

I agree with Foxy and Dakota about the decision process. However, forum members do have a duty and a right to challenge a decison if the percieve it to be ill concieved or inappropriate. I don't think we should have a poll about this. I do think we should debate it BEFORE agreeing that it is appropriate to take RBOS money.

Personally, I do not think any business should sponsor POL, it compromises our postion as a free community. The Portobello Reporter doesn't have a sponsor neither does the community council. We should not have one. The business directory is a level playing field and it is enough. The fundraising team have done brilliantly to implement it.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 02 Sep 2005, 11:54

I have decided to become enthusiastic about the new corporate "ROBOPOL" and am going to start seeking new revenue streams to feed our new identity.

To start, there is far too much gold under the streets of Zurich, especially all the pesky stuff looted from houses and mouths during the "difficult times" of German occupation of Poland. We need to find out which banks are the best at keeping hold on this element, and get them to liberate some of it for us.

I'm sure they'll keep our identity secret.

dccairns · Post by **dccairns** » 02 Sep 2005, 13:39

I just came upon this thread when I got home late last night.

Here is my tenpenn'orth, for what it's worth.

First of all, thanks to Dadaist for raising this debate. I heard from Bob of his intention to do this, felt uneasy about it but said nothing when I should have. I should have questioned and challenged this decision, to which I was not party.

I do not feel comfortable with the RBS logo plastered on the POL home page and as far as I know we have not got the money yet, so why is it there? This is community web site and it is not appropriate for it to have any corporate logo on the home page. My question is: why do they have to have their pound of flesh for their Â£500? Standard Life printed the business cards and do not have their corporate logo emblazoned on them.

If we do not need the money, let's not take it. If we need to raise funds, there are many other ways we can do that. I do not and have never seen the business directory as a fund raising exercise; I see it as a way to support and promote local businesses and do not have a problem with the banks becoming ordinary members like everyone else. These gadgets that Bob proposes to buy (what is a 3G card anyway?), for whose benefit are they? If money is raised in POL's name there should be some consultation on how it is spent. And the accounts should be available for all to see, not just a select few.

If you think about the Â£20 charge to become a member of the business directory, then Â£20 for most of the local businesses is probably a much larger proportion of their annual turnover than Â£500 is of RBS's turnover. Ergo, if you go by proportionality, maybe all the local small businesses should have their logo on the home page.

I say ditch the logo and the sponsorship from RBS. I think we should have a poll on this.

Just for the record, I would not take money from Tesco or any other large corporation for that matter.

bellybabe · Post by **bellybabe** » 02 Sep 2005, 13:40

Can I just clarify something? I am a moderator and administrator for this forum. The forum is an important part of POL, however it is not all of it. This is not a decision affecting the forum only, it is to do with the wider remit of POL. That has little to do with me. I'm not entirely happy with people talking about the "mods' decision" etc, nor with Porty's insistence that we as the four mods answer the questions he raises. This decision was not a moderators' decision but a fundraisers' decision.

I repeat once again: a fundraising group was set up. All forum members were advised of it and a message was posted asking for volunteers. That group made the decision. I don't really feel it's fair to say that members were not given a choice in this matter - anyone could have had a say by joining that group. Few people did, including myself.

I would not have taken RBS' money; nor would I want to take Tesco's. However, I did not give up my time and efforts to fundraise, and therefore I chose not to be involved in that decision.

BB

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 02 Sep 2005, 13:51

Once I'm done with Swiss banking we need to talk about arms sales and narcotics. Also, rather than put stickers in local windows, I think it would be much more lucrative to threaten to run them out of Porty if they *don't* contribute. If we are going to get in bed with the big boys then we need to go the whole 9 yards on this.

This time next year we could be millionaires.

xxxx · Post by **xxxx** » 02 Sep 2005, 17:47

Bellybabe wrote: I repeat once again: a fundraising group was set up. All forum members were advised of it and a message was posted asking for volunteers. That group made the decision. I don't really feel it's fair to say that members were not given a choice in this matter - anyone could have had a say by joining that group. Few people did, including myself.

I agree.
If you want to find a more acceptable sponsor, join the fund raising group.
If dccairns felt doubts but did not speak up, then whose fault is that? If the RBS was ok to work for, dadaist, why is it not ok to accept sponsorship? I'm sure the contract of employment was more onerous than anything the site has agreed to.
Its an imperfect world and imperfect decisions are made, but if you are involved, beyond the clicking of a forum poll button, you will have a much better chance of directing these decisions.

dccairns · Post by **dccairns** » 02 Sep 2005, 18:39

In answer to xxxx, I have accepted responsbilibty for not speaking up sooner, however, there should have been a proper discussion and decision-making process at some point. If there was, I was not part of it.

What I am saying now is we can still have the debate and it's not too late to reverse the decision to have RBS as a sponsor. This whole issue has highlighted the question of how and by whom decisions are made regarding POL matters - and that in my opinion is a good thing.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 02 Sep 2005, 20:53

A few facts:

Those members who volunteered to help out with the local business directory have had access to a dedicated forum since 27 March. Those members include Porty and dccairns, although Porty never actually got involved. Dadaist has had access to this forum since 9 August.

We have been discussing the idea of corporate sponsorship both at meetings and online since 21 May. RBS has been in the frame since 22 May. I have been quite clear about what the LBD money would be used for and how we might use the sponsorship money. If people haven't been paying attention, that's not my problem. I don't feel any obligation to discuss these matters with anyone who didn't contribute to this effort. And yes, we are supporting local businesses by offering them an excellent service at a ridiculously low price AND raising funds for the website at the same time. It's a virtuous cirlce because the money helps to promote the website, which in turn promotes local businesses. This effort was acknowledged at the Portobello Traders Association meeting the other night, to which I was invited. My thanks to all involved with the LBD and a reminder that the job is nowhere near being finished!

At no point, until now, has any member of the team expressed doubt over RBS as a potential sponsor, or over how the LBD money was spent.

Moderators are appointed to assist in moderating the forum. Forum administrators have a wider remit, but only with regard to the forum. Wangi has administrator status because he deals with technical aspects of the site, for which we are all grateful, as does Paul for similar reasons. I am very happy with the current set up and respect the opinions and honesty of everyone concerned.

The forum is just one part of Portobello Online, the community website. It's something I'm very proud of and something I have invested a huge amount of time and effort into getting right, but as Bellybabe points out, the website is much more than this. Portobello Online is my project and has been for five years or more. I have had the pleasure of working with a large number of volunteers in that time, who have assisted in realising my aspirations for the site. All of them have been talented local residents. None of them has been paid a penny for his/her services. It has been one of the most frustrating, the most difficult but ultimately the most rewarding things I have ever done.

When I start to feel that my efforts aren't appreciated I'll find something else to do with my life and my family will probably be delighted. Some days I feel that this time isn't far off.

Please continue.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 02 Sep 2005, 21:26

xxxx wrote:
Bellybabe wrote: I repeat once again: a fundraising group was set up. All forum members were advised of it and a message was posted asking for volunteers. That group made the decision. I don't really feel it's fair to say that members were not given a choice in this matter - anyone could have had a say by joining that group. Few people did, including myself.
I agree.
If you want to find a more acceptable sponsor, join the fund raising group.
If dccairns felt doubts but did not speak up, then whose fault is that? If the RBS was ok to work for, dadaist, why is it not ok to accept sponsorship? I'm sure the contract of employment was more onerous than anything the site has agreed to.
Its an imperfect world and imperfect decisions are made, but if you are involved, beyond the clicking of a forum poll button, you will have a much better chance of directing these decisions.

They weren't ok to work for. But you don't see me making a blanket ban on working for them or using them. I only address sponsorship of a *community* website which has recently been involved in a high profile campaign against a similar corporation, and won.

We didn't want Tesco to build in our back yard. Bob supported that. I'm happy to be wrong and in the minority for suggesting that RBOS sponsorship is a bad thing, but we should be allowed to discuss it even if the discussion does not have an effect on the decision.

Bob has played his most exclusive card on us - which seems to hint that disagreement is tantamount to betrayal and will lead to the closure of the site. None of us want that, Bob - we love it here as much as we love you.

POL has become a family, and family members argue with each other because they care more. I would ask Bob to respect the spirit in which criticism is offered in exactly the same spirit that praise is offered, as to my mind they are two sides of the same coin.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » 02 Sep 2005, 21:29

Bob I for one appreciate all that you have put into the website/POL and I am sure everyone else does too.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 02 Sep 2005, 21:44

And I for one have no morals when it comes to money

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 02 Sep 2005, 21:49

Epykat wrote:And I for one have no morals when it comes to money

Yeah but you do a great Linda Barker impression. Your colour co-ordination more than makes up for the fact that you disagree when I want to paint the world Red. Geddit.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 02 Sep 2005, 21:52

I'm blushing now. I've always wanted to get closer to Lawrence.....

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 02 Sep 2005, 21:55

Lawrence Marshall?

Sorry, I'm not much good at popular cultural references.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 02 Sep 2005, 21:59

Bob Jefferson wrote:Lawrence Marshall? Sorry, I'm not much good at popular cultural references.

Well, I suppose they do have lots in common. Property development for one

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 02 Sep 2005, 22:00

Bob Jefferson wrote:Lawrence Marshall? Sorry, I'm not much good at popular cultural references.

Bowen. Lawrence Bowen, like Jim except wallpaper instead of darts.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 02 Sep 2005, 22:01

You forgot the Llewellyn - he's hyphenated you know

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 02 Sep 2005, 22:04

Epykat wrote:You forgot the Llewellyn - he's hyphenated you know

Ah, that's what's wrong with him!

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 02 Sep 2005, 22:14

What happens when two hyphenated people marry?

Would she be Tara Palmer-Tomkinson-Llewelyn-Bowen or what?

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 02 Sep 2005, 22:26

Oh, like Lawrence would marry a slag like her - hypothetical question - would never happen

dccairns · Post by **dccairns** » 03 Sep 2005, 17:22

In answer to Dadaist, I am not sure you are in a minority or wrong, when it comes to being concerned about sponsorship from RBS. Unfortunately it seems we are not to have a debate on it, or the decision-making processes (or lack of them) on this website. Pity, because I think these are important issues. There will be more decisions to be made in the future and it would be useful to know what the preferred method is, e.g. consensus, executive, voting, etc.

Gemini · Post by **Gemini** » 03 Sep 2005, 17:57

dccairns wrote:I just came upon this thread when I got home late last night.

Here is my tenpenn'orth, for what it's worth.

First of all, thanks to Dadaist for raising this debate. I heard from Bob of his intention to do this, felt uneasy about it but said nothing when I should have. I should have questioned and challenged this decision, to which I was not party.

I do not feel comfortable with the RBS logo plastered on the POL home page and as far as I know we have not got the money yet, so why is it there? This is community web site and it is not appropriate for it to have any corporate logo on the home page. My question is: why do they have to have their pound of flesh for their Â£500? Standard Life printed the business cards and do not have their corporate logo emblazoned on them.

If we do not need the money, let's not take it. If we need to raise funds, there are many other ways we can do that. I do not and have never seen the business directory as a fund raising exercise; I see it as a way to support and promote local businesses and do not have a problem with the banks becoming ordinary members like everyone else. These gadgets that Bob proposes to buy (what is a 3G card anyway?), for whose benefit are they? If money is raised in POL's name there should be some consultation on how it is spent. And the accounts should be available for all to see, not just a select few.

If you think about the Â£20 charge to become a member of the business directory, then Â£20 for most of the local businesses is probably a much larger proportion of their annual turnover than Â£500 is of RBS's turnover. Ergo, if you go by proportionality, maybe all the local small businesses should have their logo on the home page.

I say ditch the logo and the sponsorship from RBS. I think we should have a poll on this.

Just for the record, I would not take money from Tesco or any other large corporation for that matter.

I have read over the pro's cons of this topic, and agree with dccairns/porty and dadaist.
Similarly, I should like to know what a 3g card is? and how and by
whom, will it be utilised ?. hypothetically - should I, as a forum user, which to borrow it - could I?

As to the position of the accounts - having been involved in the PCATS
campaign, every penny that was spent was accounted for by the Group, with free access to any person in the community wishing to view the accounts, after all, the Portobello Community, funded PCATS!

There must be openess and accountability, when using public money.

I totally disagree with POL accepting corporate funds, more especially
when, by all accounts, they are not required.
What is the big Picture for POL? Where does Bob wish to take it?

This is a Community Web Site, funded by the community, for the community.
Let's keep it that way.

I say that we should have a Poll on this.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 03 Sep 2005, 20:57

If you don't know what a 3G card is then I'm not very likely to lend you it, although the digital recorder is currently on loan to a trusted forum member.

The traders who have signed up to the online directory were told that all money raised from this would be held by Portobello Community Council and used exclusively for the promotion of Portobello Online. That goes for any money we raise through sponsorship as well. As I have already made clear, the details of the LBD account are available to those members who volunteered to help out with this project. As you aren't one of those people, what makes you think you should have any say in how the money is spent? Sorry, but you have to do a bit more than just post the odd message from the comfort of your keyboard to have a say in how Portobello Online is run.

So what's your motive? Shall we have a poll on that?

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 03 Sep 2005, 21:40

Bob Jefferson wrote: Sorry, but you have to do a bit more than just post the odd message from the comfort of your keyboard to have a say in how Portobello Online is run.

Not sure we should be talking to our members like that, Bob. So you're not going to start collective decision making on your site - fine - but when you're in a management position you're at least supposed to appreciate and understand "feedback" even if you disagree with it and are going to file it in the bin.

There is a much broader question being asked here about what a community website is - at the very least, each community member gets a voice and one of the nice things about the forum is that you *don't* have to do anything other than sit at your keyboard - it's a virtual community.

Sure, you don't get a say in how Portobello is run unless you do something for it. But to say that people who only interact online shouldn't get a say in their website is a contradiction in terms.

Post by **wangi** » 03 Sep 2005, 21:49

I'd broadly agree with that...

Gemini · Post by **Gemini** » 03 Sep 2005, 22:53

Bob Jefferson wrote:If you don't know what a 3G card is then I'm not very likely to lend you it, although the digital recorder is currently on loan to a trusted forum member.

The traders who have signed up to the online directory were told that all money raised from this would be held by Portobello Community Council and used exclusively for the promotion of Portobello Online. That goes for any money we raise through sponsorship as well. As I have already made clear, the details of the LBD account are available to those members who volunteered to help out with this project. As you aren't one of those people, what makes you think you should have any say in how the money is spent? Sorry, but you have to do a bit more than just post the odd message from the comfort of your keyboard to have a say in how Portobello Online is run.

So what's your motive? Shall we have a poll on that?

My question was purely hypothetical, although, I am glad to learn that the the other equipment is with a forum member, that can, be trusted!

Sorry to dissapoint you, I don't expect/want, any say in how the money is spent?

I have no motive, why would I?

I, and it would appear, that others, would welcome a poll, isn't what this topic is all about, if POL, should accept sponsorship from RBOS?

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 03 Sep 2005, 23:28

You surely wouldn't expect the Government to have a poll on every decision they make when running the country would you? We have a Government to run the country on our behalf, to make decisions for us. It is totally impractical and plain stupid to have to have a poll on every single thing needing or being done. The Moderators and Administrator have very generously given up their (free) time to set up and run this Forum and should be left to get on with it. If people aren't happy about they way they're doing this then don't log in. This is a Community Forum which people, like me, log on to for a bit of light entertainment. It is not THAT important to me. I've had a lot out of it and I thoroughly enjoy it but to get your collective knickers in such a twist about something like this is just ridiculous. Carry on Bob et al. I don't care where the money comes from and I trust you to spend it as you see fit.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 04 Sep 2005, 00:05

Epykat

I wouldn't expect the Government to have a poll on every decision, no. But firstly, they got voted in, and secondly when it came to the important stuff (like going to war) they, er, had a vote. I think it's the "important issue" and "voting" bit you missed. Yes.

There's a big difference between delegated responsibility (autonomy) which should at least be transparent and subject to oversight, and unaccountable, unelected and hidden decisions (I address your parallel of Government here, not POL) which are by definition more prone to individual whim and corruption.

So, what if one of the Moderators calls for decision-making to be open and democratic? This one does. But I value your feedback.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 04 Sep 2005, 00:55

Dadaist, I want you to know that I value your feedback on this issue. Your use of the words 'unaccountable', 'unelected', 'hidden decisions', 'individual whim', 'corruption' all helps me to come to a decision as to whether I really want to continue doing this.

I'm trying very hard to accept it all as I would from a loving family member, but the truth is that I'm finding your allusion to be more of an illusion, or perhaps a delusion on your part.

The sharks are circling and there's a nasty whiff of politics. I think I need some fresh air.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 04 Sep 2005, 09:45

This thread has begun to sound like some sort of witchhunt. The issue originally raised regarding corporate sponsorship has for a handful of users, spawned further issues of who runs POL and where accounts are published. As Bob conceived the idea of POL, registered it and is the driving force at it's helm, putting in years of work, POL and Bob are indivisible. Criticism of how POL is run is direct criticism of Bob.

Help in running, promoting and developing the site is to be welcomed. Grumbling about decisions that are made while not being prepared to give up any free time working for the site IMHO carries little weight.

Corporate sponsorship for the site was pursued and gained. OK, for political and business reasons some don't approve. Get over it. The RBS logo is on the site to stay.

All monies are kept, not under Bob's bed, but with the Portobello Community Council. Cheques from businesses registered with the LBD were made payable to the Portobello Community Council. Receipts were issued for all payments and records kept. The inference that Bob is not 100% above board with "public money" angers me.

Bob is POL's boss and that seems to be the real problem here for some - it's not that they don't like Bob personally but they don't like bosses.

teddygirl · Post by **teddygirl** » 04 Sep 2005, 10:28

I've kept out of this one up until now as politics are not my forte but if Bob needs to know that he has support from the mere mortals that use this forum then he has mine.
I personally have banked with the RBOS for over thirty years so it would be very hypocritical of me to say ditch them. I don't see the problem in taking their money. Nobody is forced to work for them or deal with them.

Dakota · Post by **Dakota** » 04 Sep 2005, 10:50

I have to say I agree with Marya. We've had our moan, but few of us taking part in this debate actually volunteered to help with fundraising.

I, for one, appreciate this community resource, and I am happy to accept the decisions of those who - unlike me - put real time and effort into the website.

Cynthia · Post by **Cynthia** » 04 Sep 2005, 11:01

Quote Marya:

As Bob conceived the idea of POL, registered it and is the driving force at it's helm, putting in years of work, POL and Bob are indivisible. Criticism of how POL is run is direct criticism of Bob.

Help in running, promoting and developing the site is to be welcomed. Grumbling about decisions that are made while not being prepared to give up any free time working for the site IMHO carries little weight

.
and

Corporate sponsorship for the site was pursued and gained. OK, for political and business reasons some don't approve. Get over it. The RBS logo is on the site to stay.

I was holding off adding my views as I wanted to read this thread in detail first but I feel incensed by your attitude here Marya - don't members' views count at all about how the site is run? not everyone can be a moderator or committee member - if there is a committee.
I was going to say, and still do, before my blood pressure went up reading your attitude to POL posters that it would be a great shame if the Forum did not exist - I hope Bob does not resign as he clearly puts a lot of work into it.
BUT the Forum would not be a Forum if people did not post on it - or if you exclude people who object to not being consulted about major decisions.

I for one am totally opposed to sponsorship by any corporate (for profit - business) organisation of any community on line forum, campaign or organisation. Sponsorship comes with strings attached usually and even if it doesn't it attachs you to the values of that organisation - big business tends not to have the same values as community organisations, which are not for profit.

Everything is political - accepting corporate sponsorship is highly political, although perhaps Bob did not think this at the time he accepted it.

I am unclear, although maybe its been said and I haven't read the whole thread, why POL needed more money? can you explain again? I am not at all implying its been misused - I make it clear here I am not questioning that at all - I am just confused as to why more money is needed and what for? Perhaps we could have had a fundraiser to raise this money and enjoyed another community event in the process rather than accepting RBOS money?

I think as POL is clearly linked with PCC even more reason why consultation should be inbuilt - clearly that is part of the PCC role too.

It seems a bit draconian to say that people who post on this Forum should not express a critical view of how it is being run.....but we are allowed to express critical views of other things, part of the joy of a forum and its reason I would think.

Not at all happy.....

Talk Porty ~ Portobello

POL versus Royal Bank Of Scotland

what?!!!!