Fun dosn't - the pursuit of fun via negotiation with landowners etc does. That is really the main point/thrust of GAGB and (even to the untrained eye) it appears that events in the New forest (if nowhere else) prove that official representation might help us all.Originally posted by Chris n Maria+Nov 9 2003, 10:25 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Chris n Maria @ Nov 9 2003, 10:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--BugznElm'r@Nov 9 2003, 09:32 PM
Why does "fun" need a commitee? An association?
<just wondering> If you don't see the need for the association then why are you here? </just wondering>
Chris [/b][/quote]
We all know the main thrust/point of GAGB.
We all have fun caching and I agree the GAGB must be a serious organisation and electoral legitimacy is central to this.
No-one should be able to by-pass scrutiny when it suits them by saying it doesn't matter.
Teasel (who I voted for) & Paul Blitz (who I didn't because I don't know him) stood as individual candidates and they must honour their mandate as individuals. The fact that they would almost certainly have been voted in as a family is not legally relevant.
Sorry to press the point but ending this issue now saves problems in the new year.
Seasider