Polls & Surveys

This Consultation Paper follows the report of the London Team

Introduction
I write this on my own initiative & without the prompting from anyone in the DAG. I wish to make it clear that I have neither been canvassed as a successor to Diver nor am I offering myself as candidate as leader of the DAG. I write purely in the role of facilitator. I do so as someone with a Masters Degree in Management & as a former manager of my own highly successful business.

My Story states I just escaped from being caught by the debacle of 8th.October 2008. That is why I am Lucky Jim! I have been advised that as the Forum Profile format did not make provision for other financial interests in KSFIOM I could tick I am a depositor because through a legal instrument I have made an interest free loan to a depositor who was made penniless by the collapse of KSFIOM. In effect I will be the beneficiary of compensation when it is paid. Thus I have a de facto interest in KSFIOM. However, I have chosen NOT to say that I was a depositor because that would not have been a true statement.

From the outset I joined the DAG to offer my substantial managerial expertise, together with my considerable experience as a senior moderator in another forum. I was invited to join the now defunct Core Group, and was Editor/Moderator until the Forum was split into two & these roles were dropped.

The London Team Report
What I now have to say is not a criticism of the members of the London Team members. I have the greatest respect & admiration for each of them; they are all truly great people & have done an amazing job.
Whilst I welcome its report, I am somewhat concerned that it remains anonymous, it having been written both in the third person and the first, but unsigned.

My other concern is that I believe Most members of the DAG do not know the people who are in the Team. Also the DAG does not know to whom Diver has handed his mantle.
I believe that the DAG would like to have a say as to who is leading it, just as it did when Diver was selected as its first leader (however imperfect that was in democratic terms, it worked!)

Right now I:
1. support the Team in this transisitional period in which Diver hands over the reins
2. accept the need to raise money to meet necessary legal costs

That said, there are a number of issues that are of concern to some - if not all - of the membership of the DAG which need to be addressed.

1. Diver originally headed The London Team working in tandem with another Team in the Isle of Man ably led by expat.. Subsequently Diver broke away from the DAG to form what was known as Diver’s informal Team .
   Essentially Diver’s informal team was free from external control and constraint whilst still reporting to the Forum & seeking its support in its pursuit of the objectives that it considered desirable to achieve the DAG’s Mission. Central to this was a conviction that legal advice & representation was essential to the task. Not all members shared that view. However, Diver enjoyed the support of the majority of members, a support that has been continuous to this day.

2. Notwithstanding the generality of the great support that Diver enjoyed, inevitably there were issues which were of concern to members. One was the infrequency of communication between Diver & the DAG through the Forum, and the other was the representation of views that were specifically those of Diver & his Team (including legal advisers) which claimed to represent the majority view of the DAG when the DAG never had opportunity to consider whether it did in fact concur. (eg: John Wright’s Affidavit to the Court 29/1.)

3. A well moderated forum such as the CHAT Forum can be a good vehicle:
   -- for gathering & sharing ideas & discussing issues;
   -- for offering support & encouragement to members;
   -- for expressing feelings of anger, anxiety, furstration & despair.

However, a forum per se would not be any organisation’s chosen means by which to manage a campaign to achieve a mission such as that of the DAG

4. I feel the time is right to have a review of the way in which the DAG manages the task of fulfilling its Mission
The DAG needs to have a management, administrative & logisitcs structure that is appropriate for what it seeks to do

I suggest what is now required is a SIMPLE management structure to undertake the following key tasks:

1. Operational Management
responsible for:
a. Strategy & Tactics and liaison with the IOM Team
b. Public Relations,/Press Releases
c. legal consultation & representation
d. fund raising for financing the websites & legal fees

2. Administrative Management
responsible for:
a. senior Forum administrator/co-ordinator role
b. IT personnel in charge of the 2 Forum websites
c. Editors/moderators for the CHAT website

5. I firmly believe that the time has now come for the London Team to come back into the heart of the DAG as its Operational Management Team In effect it already carries out the operational management task as I have outlined above, but it would do so in a more transparent and integrated way as part of the Forum and not as an appendage to it.

Conclusion
The time is right for the DAG to overhaul its Manageral & Administrative structure in order for it to be better able to serve its members interests in working more effectively in achieving the DAG’s Mission. . The means of accomplishing the Mission would be better served if the informal London Team were brought back into the DAG as its Operational Management Team

Footnote
If there is a consensus for what I have outlined supported by a Poll, I would be happy if there were a member willing to undertake the work to bring this about. Failing this I would be willing to undertake the task.

LJ