Dear Woodro Part 2

Follow the money.

There's money? Where?

There's money? Where?

Where's Dear Woodro Part 4? I wanted to comment on the OPs comment about Mark being compared to Digger in the amount of contribution to the shore.

I don't know how you can compare someone who has put in over 25 years and thousands of volunteer hours to someone who has been working for the NSMBA as a PAID employee for the last 4 years.

That's a bit insulting.

Where's Dear Woodro Part 4? I wanted to comment on the OPs comment about Mark being compared to Digger in the amount of contribution to the shore.

I don't know how you can compare someone who has put in over 25 years and thousands of volunteer hours to someone who has been working for the NSMBA as a PAID employee for the last 4 years.

That's a bit insulting.

In Rachid's defence, he said (paraphrased): He believed that Mark would go down in history as having made a similar contribution to Todd (I.E. Not a comparison of their current bodies of work) based on his measure of both of their passions for trail building on the Shore.

…

Additionally, a number of Digger's recent projects have been, at least partially, funded either through TAP or other grants. That funding doesn't come close to covering the huge amount of hours he has put in (and continues to put into) the shore, but it is not accurate to refer to all his efforts as "volunteer."

That isn't to take anything away from Digger's huge -- and largely voluntary -- contribution to trails on the Shore, but to highlight the other side of your point, which is Mark's compensation.

It is true that Mark is a paid, full time, employee of the NSMBA; however, it is also true that between his various duties and all the trail building projects he is working on he volunteers a great deal of time in addition to the hours he is paid for.

That isn't a defense in any way of the claims Lee has brought forward, and I have certainly had disputes/disagreements with Mark, But whichever side of the Passion vs. Polarizing fence you are sitting on I don't think it is fair to criticize Mark Wood for anything without also giving him his due for all the great projects he has been instrumental in accomplishing.

You would have to keep building for a decade or two to achieve Digger status.

Look at how most everyone has already forgotten about the key builders from the 90s. Jeremy, PD, Dean, Lester, Karen, even Syncro to some extent. (not a complete list!)

You may think the work they did is antiquated, but those guys put more hours into the trails than most of those building now. Yet we hear people denigrating their work on a fairly regular basis.

Apart from a few people, the community really has a short-term memory for those who built and maintained the trails they ride. Luckily most aren't in it for fame and recognition.

Look at how most everyone has already forgotten about the key builders from the 90s. Jeremy, PD, Dean, Lester, Karen, even Syncro to some extent. (not a complete list!)

I don't know about most or forgotten. There is no history book, so anyone who has started riding since those days could be excused for not knowing who they are… The same way that if you've never tasted Karen's banana bread in the middle of a rainy trailday you could be excused for not being able to describe its deliciousness.

Syncro-Mark raised enough money for a pro-level chainsaw in a day, Karen is back building on Boundary and as always her art speaks for itself, and I've heard Dean mentioned a few times in the last few weeks (along with other-Peter and old-man-Peter) re. UOC, and I'm far from being old school, original or hardcore and those names all mean something to me (as do many others).

Luckily most aren't in it for fame and recognition.

And never mind the "glamorous" work of digging gold, splitting rungs, etc… in my experience there are always people willing to step up and volunteer on the trails -- and if you put in enough time folks will know who you are.

What about dedicated long time volunteers like Rachid or The Grantfather, Papa John, who are barely recognized for their huge contributions now never mind in a decade because those huge contributions aren't directly reflected on trail.

Definitely lots of passionate people who have quietly given (and give) a lot of time to our amazing network.

I've always been grateful for Karen's work on Boundary. Always stop and give my thanks when I see her.

In Rachid's defence, he said (paraphrased): He believed that Mark would go down in history as having made a similar contribution to Todd (I.E. Not a comparison of their current bodies of work) based on his measure of both of their passions for trail building on the Shore.

…

Additionally, a number of Digger's recent projects have been, at least partially, funded either through TAP or other grants. That funding doesn't come close to covering the huge amount of hours he has put in (and continues to put into) the shore, but it is not accurate to refer to all his efforts as "volunteer."

That isn't to take anything away from Digger's huge -- and largely voluntary -- contribution to trails on the Shore, but to highlight the other side of your point, which is Mark's compensation.

It is true that Mark is a paid, full time, employee of the NSMBA; however, it is also true that between his various duties and all the trail building projects he is working on he volunteers a great deal of time in addition to the hours he is paid for.

That isn't a defense in any way of the claims Lee has brought forward, and I have certainly had disputes/disagreements with Mark, But whichever side of the Passion vs. Polarizing fence you are sitting on I don't think it is fair to criticize Mark Wood for anything without also giving him his due for all the great projects he has been instrumental in accomplishing.

Dear DrewM, and nathanjessup@gmail, my comment intended to voice that that both have or will leave their mark on the North Shore.

Undeniably Digger is a legend, a man of vision and dedication. I respect and admire him dearly. I am in awe of his accomplishments and of his achievements.

As for Mark W., he came up with the concept of the Trail Adoption Plan, he had this great idea of, on a large scale, leveraging volunteer effort and corporate participation on the shore. The program, as such, has done and continues to accomplish the gargantuan task of revitalizing the shore by allowing the NSMBA, through its members and supporters, to perform more work than it could have otherwise under the earlier model of public trail days. It is thanks to all of our builders, our sponsors [HTML_REMOVED] their staff, the public, the active land managers, and the effort of countless volunteers than we have been able to accomplish so much over the past few years. Mark has managed the relationships with the TAP sponsors, with the land managers, as well as with the builders on the ground. If for no other reason than TAP, Mark will be remembered, in my opinion - he also puts in a ton of trail building hours - many of which on a volunteer, unpaid basis.

My original comment was not to compare the two in work performed to date, it was the bring into focus that Mark has done a great deal of good for the shore - a sentiment that even his staunchest critic will concede.

This is not to say that other builders have not done great things. It was a singular comment to create parallel.

As for the Pt.4 thread, Vince, and I thought that it was no longer serving the purpose that I intended for it to serve. So, I took it down. I appreciate all of the comments, PMs, emails and phone calls from various board users regarding the thread, and I felt that there is a need to take the discussion out of the public domain. With that, I welcome any comment or question regarding my actions to be sent to [email protected]

As for recognition DrewM, if I am not remembered as a rambling fool, everything will not have been in vain.

respectfully yours,
Rachid

NSMBA Treasurer

As for Mark W., he came up with the concept of the Trail Adoption Plan, he had this great idea of, on a large scale, leveraging volunteer effort and corporate participation on the shore. The program, as such, has done and continues to accomplish the gargantuan task of revitalizing the shore by allowing the NSMBA, through its members and supporters, to perform more work than it could have otherwise under the earlier model of public trail days. It is thanks to all of our builders, our sponsors [HTML_REMOVED] their staff, the public, the active land managers, and the effort of countless volunteers than we have been able to accomplish so much over the past few years. Mark has managed the relationships with the TAP sponsors, with the land managers, as well as with the builders on the ground. If for no other reason than TAP, Mark will be remembered, in my opinion - he also puts in a ton of trail building hours - many of which on a volunteer, unpaid basis.

yes, in it's current form the TAP program works well and Mark has been a key part in it's success. however it is somewhat unfair to give all credit to him and the recent boards. well before Mark was participating there was an adopt a trail program loosely going on. as well, peter campbell had started the idea of getting corporate sponsors in general and for trail days (and brought in significant amounts of cash on a yearly basis). edit - this was the first time where the nsmba had significant revenue outside of paid memberships.

part of what burns me and other people is this notion that there has been "decades of neglect" and that those involved the past few years have been the saviours of the shore. forgetting, not understanding or even denigrating the organizations history and the people who have helped is something that should not be happening and is part of the problems we see here today.

it's important to rally the troops, but for volunteer driven not for profit organizations, humility is also a key part of the recipe for success.

Rachid - why does Marks stance on AA seem to differ from NSMBA's, and why does his alleged behaviour seem to get a free pass from NSMBA?

his alleged behaviour

We could all be subject to alleged behaviour.
And if something happened at an NSMBA meeting a while ago, it should have been dealt with -completely dealt with- back then.

Bringing up inter-personal sins of months past, as part of a larger complaint months later, is not kosher. It's just not a fair way of dealing with such matters.

You're right…it should have been dealt with. Apparently it hasn't…otherwise we wouldn't be here, would we.

That's why I directed my question to Rachid - the only NSMBA board member who has posted in these threads in an "official" capacity.

Rachid - why does Marks stance on AA seem to differ from NSMBA's, and why does his alleged behaviour seem to get a free pass from NSMBA?

Hi Tom, the NSMBA's position regarding AA and all other shore trails is outlined in detail in the NSMBA 101 document published on www.nsmba.ca ( http://www.nsmba.ca/nsmba-101-0) , to the best of my knowledge, Mark's view does not differ from what is outlined in the above referenced document.

As for the alleged behaviour getting a free pass; the appropriate actions were taken in order to investigate and substantiate concerns brought forth and those with merit were address, privately.

Hi Tom, the NSMBA's position regarding AA and all other shore trials is outlined in detail in the NSMBA 101 document published on www.nsmba.ca ( http://www.nsmba.ca/nsmba-101-0) , to the best of my knowledge, Mark's view does not differ from what is outlined in the above referenced document.

As for the alleged behaviour getting a free pass; the appropriate actions were taken in order to investigate and substantiate concerns brought forth and those with merit were address, privately.

Thanks.

These threads are ridiculous. Cam, time to take threads like these down.

I would love to see this sort of stuff disappear Kever. Contrary to popular belief, this doesn't help our bottom line one bit and our goals for this mountain bike community always supersede the bottom line anyway.

We'd like to see the parties involved sit down and have a moderated discussion about this but it seems that both sides are more dug in than ever.

Our responsibility in this case is to enforce our terms of use. These checks and balances are what keep us honest, the way the law is supposed to govern police behaviour to prevent abuses of power.

At this point it appears that our terms of use have not been violated. We aren't able to watch threads like this constantly and we often rely on our users to let us know when a line has been crossed. Thus far posts from this thread have not been reported to my knowledge and our oversight hasn't revealed any violations.

If we were to take down every thread we don't like that would violate our principles and our integrity. Despite our allegiances and our community goals, we are not going to take sides by removing a thread simply because one party or another would like it removed. As with any thread, the OP can remove at their discretion.

We aim to remain true to this community and abide by the rules we set out for ourselves. If I was a rank and file member of this forum that is certainly the way I'd like to see it governed, so that's what we do.