New posts

Dear Woodro Part 2

July 30, 2015, 8:16 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: July 9, 2015

I suppose I equated "flaming" with public defamation of character. By the wiki definition you're right, no forum rules have been broken.

Kever - I said I would give you a more detailed response and here it is.

Re: Part 1 Asian Adonis

Mark has a vision of what he wants the lower seymour zone to look like and was peeved that a trail was built outside of his vision. I'm not saying his vision was the only one that matters, but I am saying that the trail was put in without consulting the NSMBA, and he feels this is done in poor taste. He has told me that metro van has used the building of asian adonis as an excuse to put off or nix other projects in that area. Why metro van is concerned about happenings in land not managed by them is a mystery to me.

The changing of the description and negative reports are on him.

I don't know if Mark Wood has a vision for the Lower Seymour Zone but if he did I would point out that Mark never told us about it.

The claim that building AA or SS negatively impacted the Metro Van relationship is directly contradicted by conversations Sharon and I have had with Metro Van "its not on our land, we don't care". I would further point out that while Mark was a NSMBA employee, in 2011 he built Gnomer (later becoming a portion of Forever After) on Metro land without Metro permission. If you want confirmation of that PM me and I will give you the contact information of Mark's fellow builder and other people who witnessed that building. Please don't simply accept my account; verify it yourself.

Re: Part 2 …

Mapbook. Mark is pissed that the NSMBA logo was used in the mapbook despite his asking not to. Although you started the NSMBA, at present you have chosen to operate outside of that umbrella and he feels that including the NSMBA endorsement is unwarranted for that reason. I'll have to ask him specifically about his reason for sending that private message, it seems unethical.

Sharon and Wade talked this over with Tim Ambler, the director of the NSMBA specifically tasked to deal with this issue and came to amicable resolution in 2011. Mark Wood was not involved with this resolution. IF Mark still holds a grudge about this some 5 years later then that is his personal grudge and not the NSMBA's.

I will add that the mapbook is Sharon and Wade's baby. I wrote the introduction but other than that it's their thing.

The "lies to land manager" seems to be a he said she said situation so I don't want to touch that. The crux of the Marks argument is that he sees new trails being built on seymour as a detriment to the good will the NSMBA is trying to establish with land managers. Bigger picture, he sees any new trail that is built on Fromme or Seymour (light side) as a threat to the relationship with active land managers. Hence why new trails need to remain secret, but never do because there are few secrets in North Vancouver. Matthew Bond said in a town hall meeting 2 or 3 years ago that the biggest threat to the organization was the proliferation of "loamers", due to trying to be good neighbours with land managers. Mark's intense hate of you and Sharon (which is not shared by me) stems from his view that your work is at odds with his and jeopardizes the future of his work and vision.

Mark's vision is very different than the NSMBA boards of past and present which were to try to bring in all builders as a community and try to work with them. Maybe I am wrong in that and if anyone else has a different perspective or if that is not aligned with the NSMBA's values I'd welcome hearing it. I am not the only one to point out that he is "polarizing" (Rachid's words) or that he has a you're-with-us-or-against-us attitude. I would point out that alienating builders generally doesn't work well for community spirit. See Cypress for an example.

Re: yelling at Sharon, I observed things escalating quickly at the town hall meeting and that seems to be a two way street. Other than that I can't comment.

Mark is the first to admit that he's a bit of a hothead who can let his passion and temper get the best of him. I don't think you, Sharon and him will ever fully resolve the deep dislike for each other, but I do hope that both parties can ignore each other enough to carry on working on trails. Your solution of leaving each other alone does seem to be the best possible option. Leaving each other alone means both parties stopping the mud slinging and focusing on making the best trail network for the community.

I saw Mark's reaction at the Town Hall. He was livid and turning red and purple with rage and while I was having the conversation with Vince at the NSMBA !01 presentation and clarifying that the NSMBA's characterization of unsanctioned building as rogues and parasites only applied to areas where the NSMBA had an understanding with active land managers (DNV and Metro). I knew he was enraged when we clarified that the NSMBA had no authority over trailwork on Grouse, CMHC or Cypress.

Why he would then shout and scream at Sharon for something I said is beyond me. Sharon was having a conversation with two other people when Mark interceded shouting and screaming. She tried to ignore him and tried to not engage. Mark has not explained why he did this. Perhaps he was enraged by the concept I put forward that he has no authority over the trailwork Sharon and I do in the CMHC; but I speculate.

As to your last point about his hotheadness, Mark may have a vision and a plan for the Shore trail network but alienating people who want to do trailwork independently of the NSMBA isn't going to aid him in spreading that vision. Neither is shouting/screaming at people; blackmailing their friends or lying about people.

His hotheadness is not serving him well. Like it or not he is the NSMBA's face and IMO his anger issues also does not serve the NSMBA well. But it is up the NSMBA's board and its members to choose its Program Manager and if they don't mind someone who periodically melts down and blows up in public that is the NSMBA's and the member's choice. All I would ask is that as Mark Wood leave Sharon and I alone. On this both of us can agree that would be the best thing.

July 30, 2015, 10:04 p.m.
Posts: 1320
Joined: Feb. 17, 2009

Your assumptions are wrong. I have met and worked alongside Mark on multiple trail days. I have also known Sharon since before she started riding and have helped build trails with her and Lee. No doubt Mark has put a lot of time and energy into the trails but that doesn't excuse his behavior. I also don't believe that he 'can't ' respond here.

Skooks,

Mark, along with all NSMBA directors and employees, have voluntarily agreed to and signed the Social Media Code of Conduct. Due to the nature of the thread, the Code of Conduct would prohibit Mark from replying as it contains comments direct at him that are accusatory in nature. A copy of the code of conduct can be obtained by emailing info@nsmba.ca

Regards,
Rachid


"I know that heroes ride bicycles" - Joe Biden

July 30, 2015, 10:13 p.m.
Posts: 231
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Skooks,

Mark, along with all NSMBA directors and employees, have voluntarily agreed to and signed the Social Media Code of Conduct. Due to the nature of the thread, the Code of Conduct would prohibit Mark from replying as it contains comments direct at him that are accusatory in nature. A copy of the code of conduct can be obtained by emailing info@nsmba.ca

Regards,
Rachid

i'll be the first to say it - having a code of conduct that promotes silence in the face of adversity is a huge mistake.

besides email, is a copy of the code of conduct available on the website?

I'm not a human in real life, I just play one on the internet. 

July 30, 2015, 10:37 p.m.
Posts: 333
Joined: Dec. 21, 2008

That's unfortunate. It would be helpful to hear Mark's side of the story. Having a code of silence seems like a regressive policy. Am I right in understanding that Mark's account was deactivated at his own request?

July 30, 2015, 10:52 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Aug. 12, 2007

i'll be the first to say it - having a code of conduct that promotes silence in the face of adversity is a huge mistake.

besides email, is a copy of the code of conduct available on the website?

Isn't it fairly normal policy though? Pretty sure I agreed to something along those lines when I started work for my current employer (although it's 90% personal choice for me not to mention it, even on FB)

Edit - I've just looked at our policy and being professional is at the core of it. I.e. don't engage in slanging matches…..

treezz
wow you are a ass

July 31, 2015, 4:20 a.m.
Posts: 231
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Isn't it fairly normal policy though? Pretty sure I agreed to something along those lines when I started work for my current employer (although it's 90% personal choice for me not to mention it, even on FB)

Edit - I've just looked at our policy and being professional is at the core of it. I.e. don't engage in slanging matches…..

in this day and age I have no doubt that many organizations have some sort of code of conduct in place. a common theme is that employees/members of an organization can associate themselves with the organization in social media but they should be clear in stating that their comments are theirs alone and do not necessarily reflect on the organization they represent. something to this effect is often included in the tag lines of emails or electronic communications. another idea is that if you respond to comments or accusations you consider unfair that you do so in an accurate, constructive and professional manner. ie, don't sling garbage comments back at your accuser. some organizations may choose to ban employees from responding to negative comments altogether and only allow their media people to respond to those concerns so inflammatory statements are not accidentally (or intentionally) produced.

in the nsmba's case i can see how it would be a good idea to limit who can say what in the face of criticism, but it is essential to have someone who is able to respond. imo this is even more important for volunteer based organizations to avoid any perception of trying to hide the truth in the face of adversity.

I'm not a human in real life, I just play one on the internet. 

July 31, 2015, 5:19 a.m.
Posts: 11
Joined: Nov. 20, 2005

but it is essential to have someone who is able to respond.

Regardless of everything else here… this is the truth. If you do have a contract somewhere blocking representation in social media, this is a MUST.

July 31, 2015, 8:01 a.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Aug. 12, 2007

There was a response. Rachid stated somewhere in one of these shit shows that the issue had been looked into internally (as it should). I don't see how entering into a slanging match with a load of anonymous user names would benefit anyone. I also don't see how it's any of our business. This is all just voyeuristic entertainment at this point.

treezz
wow you are a ass

July 31, 2015, 8:15 a.m.
Posts: 1320
Joined: Feb. 17, 2009

i'll be the first to say it - having a code of conduct that promotes silence in the face of adversity is a huge mistake.

besides email, is a copy of the code of conduct available on the website?

At this time the policy is not available online. If you would like a copy, please send an email to info@nsmba.ca.

regards,
Rachid


"I know that heroes ride bicycles" - Joe Biden

July 31, 2015, 10:39 a.m.
Posts: 1713
Joined: Dec. 31, 2006

Lee and Sharon I sent you an email to continue our conversation in private.

July 31, 2015, 10:47 a.m.
Posts: 396
Joined: May 27, 2003

Sharon was having a conversation with two other people when Mark interceded shouting and screaming. She tried to ignore him and tried to not engage.

I'm fortunate to count Lee, Sharon, and Mark amongst my friends, and I admire their contributions to the trails we love, so it grieves me to see this dispute played out in this way. I don't have personal knowledge of all the events/history so I'm not about to pick sides, however I do have personal knowledge of one incident so I would like to set that record straight.

I was one of the two people Sharon was talking to when Mark joined our conversation at the Town Hall meeting. I've spoken to the other person that was there and we agree 100% that at no time was there any "shouting" or "screaming". It was a heated argument with voices raised equally on both sides but no shouting or screaming by either party. It was not a constructive conversation and left both parties frustrated. I had hoped at the time it would help vent some of the frustration and both sides were giving as good as they got so at no time did I feel the need to step in. Lee was not party to the conversation.

Martin

Sustainable will be around forever.

July 31, 2015, 10:54 a.m.
Posts: 1713
Joined: Dec. 31, 2006

"Like anyone else, I too have anger in me. However, I try to recall that anger is a destructive emotion. I remind myself that scientists now say that anger is bad for our health; it eats into our immune system. So, anger destroys our peace of mind and our physical health. We shouldn't welcome it or think of it as natural or as a friend."

Dalai Lama

July 31, 2015, 11:07 a.m.
Posts: 396
Joined: May 27, 2003

"Like anyone else, I too have anger in me. However, I try to recall that anger is a destructive emotion. I remind myself that scientists now say that anger is bad for our health; it eats into our immune system. So, anger destroys our peace of mind and our physical health. We shouldn't welcome it or think of it as natural or as a friend."

Dalai Lama

I like where you're going with this Kever. Here's my contribution:

Sustainable will be around forever.

July 31, 2015, 12:33 p.m.
Posts: 15442
Joined: May 29, 2004

Skooks,

Mark, along with all NSMBA directors and employees, have voluntarily agreed to and signed the Social Media Code of Conduct. Due to the nature of the thread, the Code of Conduct would prohibit Mark from replying as it contains comments direct at him that are accusatory in nature. A copy of the code of conduct can be obtained by emailing info@nsmba.ca

Regards,
Rachid

Straight from the Stephen Harper playbook.

Nobody is asking for Mark to respond here (or at least Lee isnt) he's only being asked to leave a few people alone.

July 31, 2015, 12:35 p.m.
Posts: 46
Joined: June 5, 2014

http://www.leelau.net/2015/woodro/woodro.html#part2

These questions are directed to Mark Wood via NSMB, and via the NSMBA Facebook

1. Why did you try to blackmail an innocent trailbuilder?

2. Why did you concoct lies that Shaton and Wade's Locals' Guide mapbook contain illegal trails?

3. Why did you lie to land managers that Sharon and James planned to pay to build trails through the land manager's land?

Skooks,

Mark, along with all NSMBA directors and employees, have voluntarily agreed to and signed the Social Media Code of Conduct. Due to the nature of the thread, the Code of Conduct would prohibit Mark from replying as it contains comments direct at him that are accusatory in nature. A copy of the code of conduct can be obtained by emailing info@nsmba.ca

Regards,
Rachid

The OP asked Mark some questions based on Marks own words. If these questions were appropriately answered then the OP would not have a reason to ask them here.

Is it possible for the NSMBA representative to answer these questions?

Forum jump: