To those who have responded to my post -- my message was not solely directed
to Pam.  There were references that I made directed to Pam and the messages
on her site.  I stand by my opinion that I felt several of the messages she
relayed on her site were unprofessional and did not contribute to my
understanding of what she can bring to the board or how she could help
improve our cycling community.  Doug, there is appropriate humour and
inappropriate humour for the context of the particular situation.

Some of my comments were aimed at the entire constituency on this list --
particularly the comments about how too many people on the list were
drilling into what seemed like petty bickering and finger pointing (the
first statement in my email).  Again, in my opinion, too much energy has
been wasted in those words.  Pam Barrett "appears" to be the candidate who
was the implied representative for these individuals -- and all that
followed was more blame, finger pointing and derogatory comments, most
without concrete evidence that I could see.

The intention was not meant to be inflammatory personally to any one person
- the intention was to cite the examples I think are detrimental to the
overall goals this entire community should be trying to achieve -- in a
positive, not negative fashion.  Everyone here has a responsibility to take
it forward.  Focusing on incomplete or unfounded accusations is not a way to
do this.  Sharing and communicating how you as a bikie, or you as a future
board member can help our bike community progress, in my opinion, most
definitely is.

Sincere apologies for any offense, please take my message as a call to move
ahead.

Renee
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies

Reply via email to