Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Out of curiosity I took a look at the Trust website to see what the section about Membership actually said on this matter. In so doing I noticed that it included the following statement:-
"....In addition to the above, access is permitted to the Members Only pages of the staff website where there is more detailed news as well as behind the scenes stories....."

Really? AFAIK that facility only existed on the old archived site and even then it did not appear to be widely available to all members, just working volunteers. So is this yet another example of the Trust promising something which it is not delivering (yet)?

 

As a general point, you'd probably be better off with a single email address, and filters to move stuff you really want to read into a separate folder (let's call it 'Worth Reading') within that mailbox. Spend your valuable time on that 'Worth Reading' folder and ignore the stuff still in the Inbox until you have time to spare.

 

The current, professionally-managed website is in large part copied and pasted from the previous volunteer-managed version, which did maintain the members' only page on the pre-2020 'archive' site (which members could access by providing their name, email and membership no.) to introduce news items ahead of the general release. The archive site also provided staff-volunteer access to the staff site, which has now been supplanted by HOPS. Incidentally, as there is no area group section on the current site, area groups still (as of 17/12/23) add news items to the archive site.

Perhaps the current website team could review and refresh at least the membership part of the text, which is now outdated.

 

Hmm, I do bits of both - and increasingly use a redirect service so that I don't share my email publicly. I've sympathy with @DaveE on the volume of email - though hard copy enters the same pile of attention deficit!

 

All agreed - and yet the effect of the current process is to disempower some who get no chance to receive papers in a timely manner. And if we're thinking about honouring promises, @Old Kent Biker mentions the members only area. Due to when I joined, I've never been able to access it.

Times change, and so can promises. Electronic formats can give first dibs on news to members, just as paper ones can. The real question is about how members are communicated with and engaged, especially in how they're drawn in from the edges to more active involvement. Regardless of format, that's something that merits focus - and where IMHO newsletter 82 could have been rather better.

 

I think a lot of this discussion about format (electronic vs paper, authenticated vs open etc) is obscuring the critical issue which is about the underlying willingness to communicate.

Put bluntly - if the organisation has a secretive approach to comms, no amount of finessing over format will solve that. By contrast, if you are inherently open about comms, people will probably end up being able to access it regardless of format.

Tom

 

I would add that honesty, straightforwardness and consistency within the communications is essential also. The trust have been shown to be (at best) placing a very particular interpretation on some facts. As a result their overall honesty is now being placed in question. Add to that a tendency not to communicate unless they have to do so, and you have the perfect breeding ground for mistrust and misunderstanding, which will fester and grow into terminal reputation damage if left unchecked.

 

The simple fact is that as @Michael B has shown, the Trust - ie, "the six" - has a record of telling lies. This is not limited to OSHI, either - Mr Miles and his friends sought to blame ENPA for the s73 debacle when on fact they were wholly innocent of the allegations made in the Newslettters.

 

It seems to me that the old adage still applies - 'Leopards dont change their spots'.

 

I think there is somewhere in the region of 470 EA shareholders at the present time and approximately only 47 receive Trackbed Trails in a hard copy format, the majority of those shareholders are also members of the L&BR so its fair to say they represent a good cross section of the membership therefore it could be suggested that for the 3000 members of the L&BR approximately 300 would require hard copies only so for any interim news, views or the like this could significantly save costs. Of course we all like to receive a hard copy of the magazine and the newsletter is included in that mailing so costs there couldn't really be saved that is apart from the latest one along with its handful of draw tickets but if a magazine is to follow shortly then there is no excuse that the whole lot should have been arranged as one package

 

For what it is worth it used to be the case that the L&BR Trust Magazine used to pay for itself with advertising revenue so the only costs as far as the membership was concerned should have been of the postage, I know this might be opening up yet another can of worms, But for me the last few magazine have done nothing in telling me just what is going on in North Devon. It appears that it has become a magazine which may or may not be sold at Woody Bay and else were to the General Public.

Sure I understand that you can only write so much about the past history of the railway which is why the late Colin Pealling was very good at it.

Since we have had this discussion before elsewhere I still maintain that the magazine should have articles about what is happening now in Devon and each Area Group could be encouraged to write a report on what they have been up to.

My understanding is that a number of former contributors to the Magazine have given up suppling copy since it is not always used and very little feed back is given.

My feeling is that there are a lot of areas with in the Trust that needs to be addressed the sooner the better to be honest about it.

 

vitiligo

 

I had to look that one up - perhaps it includes having a thick skin as well.

 

Spotted today on the web:- https://www.west-somerset-railway.c...AK8WUoGd7PxNHBaFYjdSII4Uxb7OYX5u6pT6V1SycADVw

It's not clear from that whether he will continue as a volunteer or WB or has 'jumped ship' entirely to Somerset. I wonder when we will hear who the replacement MD will be?

 

I have been told today that Malcolm is still a director of the CIC, and I can't imagine he'll give up his driving.
I wish him luck with this new position.

 

I guess having enough drivers for the whole season will be vital, but from my own experience I have found that people will not be as available as they where once before, I am am not sure just how many turns you need to do at Woody Bay to keep you drivers ticket valid but lets hope we have enough active volunteers for the coming season.

 

At a guess it's going to be a bigger role than he has at the L&BR therefore naturally requiring more of his time and seeing as he is also a controller at Woody Bay will this position be affected! I wonder if this will change the Trust’s position of their persecution of Anne seeing as she is also one of the few controllers they have locally and had to step in at the last minute so many times last year to help keep the railway operational

 

The latest Magazine describes the acquisition by the Trust of one of the two larger signal boxes from use as a garden shed, and mentions debate as to whether it is the one from Barnstaple Town Station or the one from Pilton Yard. I suggested (here on page 565) that the fact that it still had its finials 20 odd years ago (although no longer) counted out the Pilton one which had lost them by 1936. The Magazine says the position of the door clearly suggests it was the Barnstaple Town box, but I am of the opinion that both boxes when originally installed were identical with the door at the back (i.e non-rail side). A print from the negative that produced the left hand of the two pictures on p58 of 'Celebration' shows the Pilton Box on a tall stone base when built, apparently done to give the Pilton Yard signalman a clear view of Braunton Road crossing over the Pilton Crossing footbridge. In the left hand of the two pictures, taken from the Braunton Road direction, the door is masked by the footbridge, but the steps going up to the back of the box are clearly visible. The 1926 picture in the Magazine shows non-regular ship-lap where this door must have been. I therefore think that when the box was lowered (probably when the wooden footbridge was rebuilt with poles and wire-mesh sides, maybe circa 1919) the box was lowered on it's base due to the need for the Pilton Yard signalman to continue being able to see Braunton crossing. (Especially after the fatal accident to the gate-keeper there in 1910). And the door on this box was moved from the back to the front.

 

A picture of a finial taken of the box now acquired on a measuring expedition in 1995 and three others by Colin Pealling when he first discovered it in 1988 showing the finials.

 

The footage may be familiar to all, but this is worth a look:

Whilst the colourisation on its own may not be up to much, coupled with the AI enhancement, it really does give the sense of "being there".