Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Its the lack of fluoride. allows for independent thought and discernment. Makes people less biddable and easily led

 

It often amazes me that - and it seems particularly prevalent among heritage railway groups - so many individuals believe they have the right to privileged information just because they are interested in a particular subject. If they want to know more, they can always pay up and join!

 

Not so good for your teeth though!

 

The problem is that we cannot "belong" to dozens of organizations ( in fact I question the value to the individual groups of having to service hundreds of non-active members, but that is a question for another day, and thread ! ). Either a heritage group wishes to stay "under the radar" of general interest, as many smaller operators do, or it wants public support to maintain or expand its operations. Both the WSR and the L&B, and their associated bodies, have opted for the latter. Having decided to do that there is an obligation to keep potential donors informed on the development of plans and the progress of projects. Granted that, where negotiations are involved, some information must be temporarily considered "privileged", it is best to maintain a regular flow of news to reassure would-be supporters.
As an example : the last news on the L & B website, other than an announcement of the Heljan Manning Wardle models, is a request for support for the share issue "The share offer is still open, but only for the short period until negotiations are completed" dated 21st October last year. The planning application was approved some time in early 2018 and an application was being made for the TWAO. Has this been lodged? , is it proceeding?, is there a problem ? Surely it is not unreasonable to provide this sort of information to supporters and well-wishers?

 

While it's not unreasonable to expect heritage railways to provide information on their progress to supporters and well-wishers it should be remembered that not everyone is in favour of the restoration of a railway in their area and those against will read the railway's website as eagerly as its supporters, but with a different motive. So the railway needs to tread a careful path between providing information to supporters and well-wishers on one hand and providing ammunition to objectors on the other. So keeping quiet on some things may well be the best plan, even if it does upset some of those who are interested in the railway's progress.

 

As a former chairman of a railway society it amazes me with what you are trying to achieve with this err let's say petty secrecy, if you think it's going to help you to gain or retain members personally I think your very deluded. There are decisions that you may wish to discuss privately with your members although such things should be few and far between (like your looking for donations to purchase something and you don't want it to be general knowledge until the deal is complete), however if I'm reading this right you have decided to restore coach 'x' instead of coach 'y', hardly the stuff that needs to be kept secret (even for a short time) within the membership. May I make a small suggestion think long and hard why you operate in this way, take a look at other societies and see how few control the information flow in this way, ask yourself has this recent spat(?) over this use/misuse of a members area actually helped or hindered your cause?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I’ve no view that I’m entitled to information as an outsider, though there are many who do, but you may want to consider how it looks when “we tell our members first” starts to morph into “we hide stuff from non members”.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Or of course a suggestion that information is restricted for the wrong reasons.

I suggest that say a supporters newsletter that goes out a week or so ahead of general publication is fine however.

 

Ok. Firstly, the information which I placed in the public domain was nothing to do with carriage restoration. It was about a matter which involved ongoing negotiations with a third party, plus a legal aspect. This was not made clear in the members area.
As the OP, my personal opinion is that, given the sensitivity of the matter, it should not have been made available to anyone, members or otherwise, outside of the railways management and working volunteers, until that issue had been resolved.
As for the Members area generally, most of the information is perhaps, only of interest to those closest to the railway, dates of meetings, the next working weekend, etc. but I'd rather leave that for the individual to decide. Theres no big secret here, and I'm speaking as a plain, bog standard Trust member.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood which issue was been kept secret, as you say if they are such delicate negotiations any such discussions are best kept under your hat to all including your members as someone could let it slip inadvertently or you never know that 100% are fully behind you and it only takes one!

As a general thrust I still think a members only area is not a good idea, if it's the right thing to release information to members it's the right time to issue to all IMHO.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

More to do with cider maybe than fluoride.
Recent posts do show how easily many heritage lines and the interest about them does get rather convoluted. Much of which is due to misinterpretations. Some matters, which are ideally kept within an 'inner circle', get leaked or become subject to a 'secret agenda'.

 

This is disingenuous. The most recent update is this from a few days ago:
https://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/story/work-progress-20th-june-1work-progress-20th-june-1
The website is updated weekly, you just need to scroll down to find it, its not always obvious.
As for the TWAO, we know no more than anyone else for obvious reasons. That level of planning has to remain completely confidential. In this highly charged, litigious world, the detractors will jump on any scrap of information they can find, and twist it to their own ends. Just ask the RVR.

 

First, an apology. The news section on the website showed the Heljan item first and then the October Share reminder, I assumed that the entries were in chronological order and therefore any other items below that would be older. As you say, it is not always obvious.

I asked about the TWAO because the impression given was that application for this would follow once Planning approval had been granted and, as some considerable time had passed without news, I wondered what the situation was. I did not ask for details, and would not expect them to be supplied, given the delicate situation involved. However I don't see why a "planning for this is still proceeding" response would be of any assistance to potential opponents, who must be expecting it.

 

While the L&B web site isn’t updated as quickly as it should be, if you are interested in the developments there are, then I suggest joining.

One of the best magazines around.

 

The planning applications may have been approved last year, but the negotiations referred to are for the purchase of a business and licensed premises. Such negotiations, which could not really begin in earnest until planning permission was granted, are not yet concluded, and are, by their very nature, required to maintain commercial confidences. As I understand it, the share offer will continue until those negotiations - which continue today - are concluded to all parties' satisfaction. (All views are my own, not officially endorsed by any other individual or group)

 

I agree about the L&B Magazine, although I should point out that the L&B website is typically updated at least once a week - far more frequently than many in this sector.
The yellow highlighted items are "sticky" so appear at the top of news items, the rest in chronological order. Enjoy!

 

Information management is always a difficult balance. We have been trying to be better at this in Somerset with the blog detailing the restoration of 9351, which seems to have been appreciated.

https://www.wsra.org.uk/category/9351-blog/

Robin

 

Martyn,
Re: BIB - is this still the case, bearing in mind the submission to the planning authorities from the owners of the said premises?

Keith

 

I'm not aware of anything preventing progress.

 

People are still using 3 letter Acronyms that mean absolutely nothing to many others.

What is BIB? Bullieds in Black?
Or is it a secret?