46233 Duchess of Sutherland.

The thing that makes me LAUGH about the whole situation is that the PRCLT actually thought they'd get away with it. From what I can see they had every intention of falsifying a "close race" then having Crimson Lake "clinch it" at the end by pulling in a questionable sum from a questionable individual.

Problem they had was rail enthusiasts are not stupid, despite them liking to think we are. We caught on from the very beginning and they had to do something, and all of a sudden BR Green wins by a large margin. They figured we'd be so interested in the fact that we'd "beaten them" and circumvented their attempted fix that we'd ignore what they had done.

For people who own and operate a steam locomotive they really do know nothing about the people who ride behind them don't they?

I say this makes me laugh but I am horrified and disgusted that it would come to this. It's a high profile locomotive, would it REALLY have that much of an issue raising funds for overhaul?

I think Mr Martin's suggestion is the best way for them to make it up to the enthusiasts, all 4 liveries one per year then they can run it in crimson lake until it falls apart, at least then no-one has been cheated and the money they paid actually counted for something for them.

 

But that is the inherent risk of a public vote and the rules which they set.

In an era where we have corrupt politicians and greedy bankers doing all kinds of harm in this world, railway preservation MUST NOT cross over into that territory. It has to be whiter than white: pure, and above all, with the best of intentions at heart, doing the right thing.

I have absolutely no doubt that the Trust felt they were doing their best by their engine but (if the report is entirely correct, and to be frank, unless Wilcock is making up these quotes, then it is entirely factual) the manner in which they have gone about it is morally reprehensible.

Which livery won is immaterial at the end of the day in comparison to these stunning admittances from the chair and former chair of the PRCLT.

 

Of course we all want to see railway projects and restorations supported... but there's a right way and a wrong way to go about it. Over on wnxx, there had been a lot of discussion about repainting D444 into blue - the owners couldnt afford it, but basically said that if all those complaining raised the money in time they'd do it, and thats what happened. If the PRCLT had asked for a specific sum to repaint the loco green for a year, none of this would've happened and they might have raised even more than they have through the poll..

Chris

 

I still find it incredible that a few "BR or nothing" paint frothers (to coin a wnxx phrase) feel they have a right to decide the livery of a locomotive but a guy who has been instramental in ensuring the loco returned to steam and running so well and reliably since is considered to have a "vested interest" and be excluded! On that basis, when NELPG have their regular livery ballots, the working membership of NELPG would be excluded but non-members allowed to vote!

And demanding the money be returned is also ridiculous! Are we saying that everyone voted not to help the overhaul of 6233 in a fun way but because they only wanted to see the loco restored if it ran in the livery they wanted and their donation was not made for the good of the loco but for their own ego? Indeed, I presume everyone who is so upset about this alleged "fix" (which appears not to have achieved the desired result anyway!) actually voted and hence made a donation "under false pretences".

I suspect this is not the only "vote" where when votes are counted is "managed" to increase the drama of the results - I bet many TV "phone-ins" are very similar!

BTW, I think we can rest assured that the Wilcock article means no-one can ever try such a poll again, so you can rest assured that there will be no repeat.

 

I still find it incredible that one individual is so against allowing others to see the loco in anything other than red that he'll pay thousands to scupper the hopes of what was clearly the majority of *supporters* who weren't just moaning, but were willing to dip into their pockets to see a change of livery for a year or two. These are not some terrible people who would rather see the loco scrapped than painted in something other than green, but people who would genuinely love to see the loco back in a livery they remember from childhood. What is so wrong with that?

Even if they didn't get it right, I'd like to think that the PRCLT acted with best intentions, given the awkward position they were seemingly put in by this one individual attempting to manipulate the poll and not really acting within the spirit I hope it was intended. I don't see any reason why this needs to be the end of such polls, they just need to ensure a more level playing field, which shouldn't be too difficult to achieve with telephone or internet voting. I think you're on dangerous teritory to allow a poll to be so easily influenced by a single person, as you run the risk of disappointing the majority of people contributing to the poll.

X-Factor really wouldn't be much of a contest if the singer with the richest family won every year.

 

hello

well they certainly fooled me i thought the preservation movment were above such tactics
i voted at least 15 times when ever i thoght the crimson mob were about to take the lead
this has tainted that idea of raising funds for a long time to come
and i for one will never give anything to the princess loco trust again
its a good job i used the works phone !!!!!!
regards

 

I can assure you that my dismay stems from the fact that I was asked to give my hard earned money and vote under false pretences. It also stems from the fact that everyone else who gave money had to also. Well.. ALMOST everyone!

I am sure most phone in votes are "managed" in a similar way too but you will notice that 99% of them do not give you a running update of the current poll results, or at least the poll result the organisation want you to see.

The reason we say that people with such a large wallet and vested interest in the loco should either be excluded or treated like the rest of us is simple. His money will go to the loco anyway. Instead because of what he chose to vote for the PRCLT decide to stagger his contribution to "even out the vote" and let us blindly vote thinking we might actually be making a difference, as opposed to rvealing how stacked the odds were for the livery in question and risking people giving up, which I may add is equally their right.

In a public vote people have a right to act on factual information, not a "worked truth" as the PRCLT decided to present to us as we shelled out money for a cause that was pretty much pre-determined.

Then there is the question of whether Mr Ewart's intentions to donate this money for the trust's preferred livery were entirely his own or whether he was asked to give his money in a certain way. That is pure speculation on my part, but it is the reason such people should not really be involved. That is more a case of morales than anything else. Frankly in terms of morality the idea of being able to write a huge cheque and cast loads of votes was a stupid idea to start with. Great for raising cash but so bad for credibility.

In short, this has nothing to do with ego.

People voted to vote for their livery but also because they were donating to the loco in a fun way.

Its the idea that they were basically co-erced into giving more money than they otherwise would through the trust effectively lying to them that has people up in arms.

I do think the money should stay with the loco, a refund is not really going to solve anything.

However I do think that since any vote results cannot now be trusted, they should just come out and say "look we handled it wrong, we'll give each of you your money's worth by restoring the loco to a great condition and running it in the 4 liveries som many of you gave money to see"

Had the poll been fair I dont think anyone would have minded about losing out on their choice of livery in the knowledge that they had donated to a good cause. Frankly the way the PRCLT have handled themselves brings into question just how good a "cause" it is now.

 

You have completely missed the point.

The NELPG ballots do not include the general public; those people who, if not for the conditions of the poll in question, may not necessarily put forward the money towards the cause. In allowing a former very high profile member the opportunity to effectively rig the poll in this manner, the PRCLT has managed to effectively fix the poll over the period of six months as a result in order to gain more funds.

I don't believe it is. These people - myself included actually - donated under the illusion that our "votes" actually counted for something. By changing the way the votes were added each week, the PRCLT did, knowingly, fix the result of the ballot. Is this fair on those who gave up their hard earned monies for what they assumed (wrongly, as it happens) was a fair voting system?

As I have said previously in this thread (several times), nobody has any qualms about donating to the trust for the good of the locomotive. It has been pointed out that it being such a high profile locomotive, it may have got the funds in any event. However the means do not justify the ends. The poll was effectively a sham in order to entice the highest amount of money out of the most amount of people, to the extent that the PRCLT were willing, as David Wilcock has exposed, to fix the vote updates every week. That is morally wrong, and an insult to all who "voted".

And yes, they have donated under "false pretenses" as you so succinctly put it, though I am afraid for all the wrong reasons.

And that is why the railway preservation movement must not do the same as mainstream media. If nothing else, railway preservationists must be the people who can be trusted with the public's increasingly limited funds for their projects, otherwise we risk alienating a rather large proportion of people who go to our railways, put pennies in our coffers, and support our projects when we need it most.

Just because the mainstream media is utterly corrupt and not beyond fixing their telephone votes does not mean railway preservation should do the same. It does not make it right, and it can and will be extremely damaging for the whole of preservation if this mantra of "the end justifies the means" continues.

If we as a movement cannot be trusted with public funds, then we risk losing the movement altogether.

And I say shame on everyone who thinks that this has been acceptable at any level.

 

So your employer could, technically, have you arrested for theft then!

 

For those of us who DO NOT subscribe to the view that the End (ie the return of DofS to the main line) justifies the Means (how ever corrupt this may be) are concerned, PRCLT may have just had their 'Ratner Moment' as far as future support for their appeals goes.

 

Seeing as the Wilcock expose includes the table showing the final result, which reveals approximately £7,500 was raised but less than £3,000 votes, which I believe were at £1 each, were cast for Maroon, I do wonder if some-one isn't having a good laugh at those for whom BR livery is a matter of life and death! I haven't ploughed through 5 pages of expose yet (I don't think W H Smiths would have liked it and there was nothing that really interested in me in SR when I know I will chance to read somebody else's copy tomorrow!), but the result doesn't tie up with figures previously quoted, at least here.

PRCLT and "Ratner" or SR and NOW?

Plenty of people actually involved in preservation have long challenged the "it must be BR" crowd of photographers to put their money where their mouth is - and PRCLT seem to have found a way of actually making them do it, as well as testing just how obsessed some of them are. I believe at the very least a point has been rather forcefully made.

 

...obsessed in comparison to the single individual (the former chair) who wanted to donate £5000 for it to stay in crimson lake livery?!

 

Best way to run this in the future is have an impartial or 3rd party managing the ballots.

 

If everybody is so bothered about the colour then don't ride behind it when it's in steam and doing what it does best but I bet 90% off people will still ride behind it no matter what colour it is so can this be the end of it cuz it's boring me now it's only bloody paint!

 

Yes 594 posts & 550 about paint it's very sad.

 

I don't care about its colour and chose not to vote but the whole sorry saga seems very underhanded to me. The idea of the poll was a good fund raising idea but to "stage manage" the voting showed (in my opinion) very poor judgement by the PRCLT.

 

May I suggest that if the whole scheme hadn't been fiddled with, seemingly from the beginning, more people would be praising the obvious quality of workmanship on the locomotive and not the gamesmanship of its owners?

 

But wasn't allowed to! Typical tabloid non-story!

I take it everyone who is so upset by the way they got the result they wanted actually donated at least £1?

As already hinted, if you are on the train, especially on the mainline, you can't actually see what colour the loco is most of the time!

 

I am frankly amazed at your blasé attitude to this news.

I know I did.

That does not make the PRCLT's effective rigging of the vote any less serious.

Last thing I'll say on the matter. Railway preservation has to keep itself whiter than white, cleaner than clean as far as dealing with the general public and charitable funds go. If you start going down that road of "the ends justify the means", then the trust between the movement and the bread and butter of the movement's money (the general public) will be broken, and once broken it is not easy to fix.

 

I'm amazed in turn by your poposity over this - it's hardly a matter of life or death. When did you become the guardian of the preservation movement's morals? Do you actually do anything practical or are you just an armchair sermon writer?