a href="http://www.lancasterarchery.com/archery-classic-register/#header">
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 55

Thread: An Open Letter to the NAA, its Board of Governers, and Executive Director

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    back "home" in Texas
    Posts
    11,755
    ... and power!
    Huh?



    John.
    Renegade Archer


  2. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Talkeetna, Alaska
    Posts
    11,409
    Huh?
    Not real power, John. Just perceived. Don't believe it? Try changing an NFAA state or sectional director. Some of these guys hold on like they think they are the President of the United States. It's amazing sometimes.

  3. #28
    The NAA has provided a formal response to my letter, and it is here for anyone that wishes to read it:

    http://www.usarchery.org/files/NAA_R...hip_8-3-07.pdf

    First, I want to thank Mr. Camp and the Executive Committee for formulating a response in such a prompt and informative manner.

    That said, I do have a couple of suggestions/offers that the NAA, its Executive Committee, and Board of Governers may wish to consider:

    1) I'm extending an invitation to utilize ArcheryTalk.com as a secondary communication tool in adition to www.usarchery.org. USArchery (its representatives, employees, committees, committee members, and board members) can establish their own username(s) and post here in the FITA Forum,

    2) The same individuals can send any desired communications through me and I will be happy to post them on ArcheryTalk.com for them, and/or

    3) I may even be able to establish a specific subforum to this FITA forum (much like the FITA classified forum) that can be used specifically and only for communications from USArchery to its members.

    If USArchery is interested, please let me know and let's see what we can work out. Information flow is the key to good relationships and fewer misunderstandings.

    Sincerely,

    Chris Olsen
    ArcheryTalk.com Administrator
    Always Strive to do What is Right
    PM me if you'd like to own your own archery store in Huntsville, AL
    BEST Zenit Riser
    W&W Limbs
    REDHDCHARM string loop material

  4. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Recordkeeper View Post
    The NAA has provided a formal response to my letter, and it is here for anyone that wishes to read it:

    http://www.usarchery.org/files/NAA_R...hip_8-3-07.pdf

    First, I want to thank Mr. Camp and the Executive Committee for formulating a response in such a prompt and informative manner.

    That said, I do have a couple of suggestions/offers that the NAA, its Executive Committee, and Board of Governers may wish to consider:

    1) I'm extending an invitation to utilize ArcheryTalk.com as a secondary communication tool in adition to www.usarchery.org. USArchery (its representatives, employees, committees, committee members, and board members) can establish their own username(s) and post here in the FITA Forum,

    2) The same individuals can send any desired communications through me and I will be happy to post them on ArcheryTalk.com for them, and/or

    3) I may even be able to establish a specific subforum to this FITA forum (much like the FITA classified forum) that can be used specifically and only for communications from USArchery to its members.

    If USArchery is interested, please let me know and let's see what we can work out. Information flow is the key to good relationships and fewer misunderstandings.

    Sincerely,

    Chris Olsen
    ArcheryTalk.com Administrator

    Excellent. Have you submitted this offer in writing as well? A formal yea or nay would be nice.

    As Alice said "Curiouser and Curiouser".

  5. #30
    Chris,
    I really wonder if the removal of Lloyd was part of the standard unspoken secrecy code about not speaking out about problems within the NAA.

    Mr. Brown was removed from his position for communication and misrepresentation issues. His removal had nothing to do with the association books.
    I have always liked Lloyd and he was one of the first NAA persons that helped me/Angela through the first rough years of dealing with the NAA bureaucracy. I have not always agreed with him but appreciated his point of view. I feel he has done archery and our youth a great service through the years.

    The NAA does not operate in secrecy. We are constantly moving to a more transparent
    organization. There are mechanisms in place that will allow more open and frequent
    communication with the different groups within our membership. We encourage the
    membership to speak directly to your representative of the board if you have any questions.
    That statement does not help in making this letter creditable. Too much history of it.
    Last edited by Archerone; August 3rd, 2007 at 05:00 PM.
    University of California
    Retiree
    Former Coach

  6. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Archerone View Post
    Chris,
    I really wonder if the removal of Lloyd was part of the standard unspoken secrecy code about not speaking out about problems within the NAA.



    I have always liked Lloyd and he was one of the first NAA persons that helped me/Angela through the first rough years of dealing with the NAA bureaucracy. I have not always agreed with him but appreciated his point of view. I feel he has done archery and our youth a great service through the years.



    That statement does not help in making this letter creditable. Too much history of it.
    I wondered about that too, Archerone. That particular part of the responses to my letter was vague and incomplete at best.
    Always Strive to do What is Right
    PM me if you'd like to own your own archery store in Huntsville, AL
    BEST Zenit Riser
    W&W Limbs
    REDHDCHARM string loop material

  7. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutnicks View Post
    Excellent. Have you submitted this offer in writing as well? A formal yea or nay would be nice.

    As Alice said "Curiouser and Curiouser".
    I have submitted this. But the venue of communication that I have chosen is indeed ArcheryTalk.com. I believe this is the most powerful archery related communication tool available. My bet is the NAA will see it.

    I actually have a subforum set up and ready to activate. I'm thinking about how to moderate it, and whether to make it a realtime live forum or a forum where the moderator has the ability to approve posts before they become visible. I want to think this through carefully to make it an effective communication tool rather than a place for bashing. I think that would be very discouraging and counterproductive. I'm willing to work with the NAA to establish an effective line for communication via ArcheryTalk.com.

    If this works out, we can look into establishing similar subforums for other national level not for profit archery related organizations. This is just in the thinking pot stage right now though.
    Always Strive to do What is Right
    PM me if you'd like to own your own archery store in Huntsville, AL
    BEST Zenit Riser
    W&W Limbs
    REDHDCHARM string loop material

  8. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Recordkeeper View Post
    I wondered about that too, Archerone. That particular part of the responses to my letter was vague and incomplete at best.
    Now I get it! NAA responses now will be transparent/incomplete to us all!
    University of California
    Retiree
    Former Coach

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Maricopa, AZ
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by Recordkeeper View Post
    I want to think this through carefully to make it an effective communication tool rather than a place for bashing. I think that would be very discouraging and counterproductive.
    I agree with your mind set here. We don't need another NAA bashing forum.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Colo Spgs Co
    Posts
    3,404
    Quote Originally Posted by Archerone View Post
    Now I get it! NAA responses now will be transparent/incomplete to us all!



    I truly doubt that this is how it will be, Transparent has a totally different meaning when used in the context and described!!!

  11. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Recordkeeper View Post
    I have submitted this. But the venue of communication that I have chosen is indeed ArcheryTalk.com. I believe this is the most powerful archery related communication tool available. My bet is the NAA will see it.

    I actually have a subforum set up and ready to activate. I'm thinking about how to moderate it, and whether to make it a realtime live forum or a forum where the moderator has the ability to approve posts before they become visible. I want to think this through carefully to make it an effective communication tool rather than a place for bashing. I think that would be very discouraging and counterproductive. I'm willing to work with the NAA to establish an effective line for communication via ArcheryTalk.com.

    If this works out, we can look into establishing similar subforums for other national level not for profit archery related organizations. This is just in the thinking pot stage right now though.
    I think I would follow up with hardcopy and have a couriers sig, for my own reference but thats just me.

    The moderation issue will be a critical negotiation point I believe. But it is just that, a negotiation point. Perhaps a shared moderation schedule with NAA having a right to remove or veto a post could work. A brief post with a reason for removal of a post may prove usefull as well in that particular type of forum. As well, a few of the "rules of warefare) may require modification or abrogation entirely. Entered into with an attitude of co operation between both parties this could be a forcefull and informative venue.


    Now, how do we keep bowhunters from posting classifieds there?

  12. #37
    The NAA has a website and, if it chooses at anytime, can give information on weekly progress and upcoming issues they are addressing. Damage control is not progress and vague statements like politicians dancing around a issue keeps us from trusting their output.
    University of California
    Retiree
    Former Coach

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Maricopa, AZ
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutnicks View Post
    I think I would follow up with hardcopy and have a couriers sig
    RK: Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't your open letter to the NAA only posted on this forum and never sent in hardcopy to the NAA? If that is the case, why would you do anything but the same here?

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Colo Spgs Co
    Posts
    3,404
    FLAMom,, RK and I have had several discussions regarding many of the issues with the NAA and the current embezzlement issue. These talks led me to a face to face meeting with Brad Camp this past week. It was at that time I made him aware of this letter and forwarded it to him via email.

  15. #40
    I see Brad Camp's response to that letter as; business as usual.

    The NAA has always operated under a cloak of inaccessibility and secretcy toward the very membership that they are supposed to serve.
    They have always behaved as though they only serve the most elite of the elite athletes.

    The shame of the whole thing is it is impossible to know how many valuable members they have discouraged or downright pushed away, people that had talent, and a passion to be a part of what should have been a once in a lifetime opportunity. People that had ideas and the talent and ability to have contributed not only to the NAA to make it a better organization, but to help fulfill our Olympic dream.

    The general membership has never allowed any accessibility or insight into the workings of the organization, the NAA has in the past been aloof and distant, and by the tone of Brad Camp's letter, remains so today, to everyone except those that are the same familiar circle of cronies. This has been so since I can remember.

    The very idea that the NAA agreed to farm out programs that had the potential to help them to raise funds, and should have been the tool to raise the bar on the manner and methods that they utilize to recruit and train coaches, along with the only real resource of youth they had...should really make one wonder... they should have taken some of our money and developed these programs themselves...

    Then to add insult to injury; we now learn that while they were raising our membership dues and tournament entry fees; (reflecting some pretty health increases,,,I might add, thus making it very difficult for families to afford to become a member and participate in the NAA organization and activities... (especially struggling families) some of them were actually skimming that money for their own use???? Come on!

    How sad for all of us, especially the NAA.

    As the Executive Director, isn't Brad Camp; like any other Executive Director in charge of any large organization, I would think he is ultimately as responsible as the lady accused of taking our (not their!!!!!!) money, and should be held accountable as well.

    Quote:
    The NAA does not operate in secrecy. We are constantly moving to a more transparent
    organization. There are mechanisms in place that will allow more open and frequent
    communication with the different groups within our membership. We encourage the
    membership to speak directly to your representative of the board if you have any questions

    To Brad Camp, In view of all that is happening, and has happened, your comment is an insult, sir. The members deserve a clearer more honest explaination than a vague reference of a "mechanism is in place". What is this mechanism... exactly how will it work?

    That answer was the same tired old answer we have been subjected to from the NAA, for just about ever...... it is still about as clear as mud.....The time has passed that you can effectively pass the buck with the same ole statement directing us to "our represenative of the board".

    IF???? we have questions? We do have many questions, and you owe to us as the Executive Director of OUR organization to answer them in a timely manner and freely with the truth.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Hudson Valley NY
    Posts
    3,132
    Quote Originally Posted by gonehuntin View Post
    They have always behaved as though they only serve the most elite of the elite athletes.
    That is the reason I have not been a member of the NAA for the last four years. I was a member prior to that for twenty years.
    Question the answers!..

  17. #42
    I think that it is time that the membership posting here starts to define "Transparency".

    I am quite interested in hearing in definite terms exactly how the org should conduct business and disseminate information in a manner which is deemed acceptable to the membership.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Dushore & Reading, PA
    Posts
    267
    Originally Posted by gonehuntin
    They have always behaved as though they only serve the most elite of the elite athletes
    .

    If you received 75+ % of your funds from the USOC to support only these athletes, how would you delegate your time and efforts?

  19. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by BILL B View Post
    .

    If you received 75+ % of your funds from the USOC to support only these athletes, how would you delegate your time and efforts?
    This is a fair question....definately one that the NAA should have asked. We should open the lines of communication with our membership to include all athletes, and coaches out there,,,,,,to invite them to assist in exploring, and developing the ideas that so the people have. Talented people that have been available to them over the years that have come up with ideas to generate fund raising, develop recruitment of potential elite athlete programs, procure additional outside support, etc. Instead, they have closed ranks, which has created and promoted an "us against them" attitude toward the very resources that is their most valuable asset. Hard to get and keep good help like that!

    It is reasonable to expect that we must honor the desires and wishes of the USOC and anyone else that oversees and provides so much major support to us... but, I bet that the USOC has never dictated to the NAA that they must remain unaccessible to the general population, to work only from within. I don't think for a moment that the USOC has mandated that NAA only is allowed to focus on the uppermost level of the elite... they are obviously concerned that we haven't developed a solid system to draw from for our future elite athletes and coaches, or the educational system we need in order to find and develop them. The fact that the best we could do was to go outside our own country, and spend so much money to acquire someone else to come in and try to show us how to define a program, for not only our athletes, but our entire teaching system, really is pitiful... what HAVE we been doing for the last decade... ? Doesn't look like much to me... what are we doing to make a positive change?

    Dishonoring the only coach that brough home gold for us in the last decade, in such a public way... (shameful, how embarassing for us as a country)...making it virtually impossible for him and all the many other excellent American coaches to have any constructive imput or activity into the development of our programs... then justifying this unacceptable public display by blaming others for the problems. I don't think this is the way the USOC has ruled we should behave as NGB.

  20. #45
    The NAA has evolved into an archery subsidiary of the USOC. It is run like an independent business or somewhat like government agency. The members are like shareholders waiting for news from the company about their investment. Shareholders are only notified about major changes to their investment. The shareholders do not have rights to know about day to day operations or are they involved in future direction. Not to say that the company does not use committees to further its' input to its shareholders while the company does what it wants. This way there will be always be a few that agree that the committee was responsible for the direction the company uses based upon the committee's decisions.
    Now I will go to the subsidiaries of the NAA( Judges, JOAD, Coaches, Etc.). They are run better than the company because they show results. They are free to communicate with each other within their group as long as they just deal with their missions. Parent Company business discussion is held to the minimum. It is not good to go off track.
    The Company wants input/output from each subsidiary. That is how they base their progress to the Master corporation(USOC). Each Subsidiary has a Spoke person with a place of importance in the Company. The Company wants to keep privacy over it's business so they aways keep a gag order and personnel screening in their ByLaws over each Subsidiary Spoke person. Shareholders have rights but are limited to annual meetings, as per ByLaws, which are always located inconveniently to the majority. Only active members that travel to that location can vote in these meetings.

    The NAA can not grow with all the controls it has in place. The ByLaws need to be sent out for discussion to each State. The NAA membership needs to give input into these ByLaws and make changes that benefit the voting rights and open discussion of the overall membership. The overall membership needs to vote on them.

    The USOC chases away independent sponsors with their National contracts. I found a National sponsor in the past but NAA /USOC conditions drove them away. The NAA needs to look hard on how to get Sponsors to wean itself from the USOC total control.
    University of California
    Retiree
    Former Coach

  21. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by gonehuntin View Post
    This is a fair question....definately one that the NAA should have asked. We should open the lines of communication with our membership to include all athletes, and coaches out there,,,,,,to invite them to assist in exploring, and developing the ideas that so the people have. Talented people that have been available to them over the years that have come up with ideas to generate fund raising, develop recruitment of potential elite athlete programs, procure additional outside support, etc. Instead, they have closed ranks, which has created and promoted an "us against them" attitude toward the very resources that is their most valuable asset. Hard to get and keep good help like that!

    It is reasonable to expect that we must honor the desires and wishes of the USOC and anyone else that oversees and provides so much major support to us... but, I bet that the USOC has never dictated to the NAA that they must remain unaccessible to the general population, to work only from within. I don't think for a moment that the USOC has mandated that NAA only is allowed to focus on the uppermost level of the elite... they are obviously concerned that we haven't developed a solid system to draw from for our future elite athletes and coaches, or the educational system we need in order to find and develop them. The fact that the best we could do was to go outside our own country, and spend so much money to acquire someone else to come in and try to show us how to define a program, for not only our athletes, but our entire teaching system, really is pitiful... what HAVE we been doing for the last decade... ? Doesn't look like much to me... what are we doing to make a positive change?

    Dishonoring the only coach that brough home gold for us in the last decade, in such a public way... (shameful, how embarassing for us as a country)...making it virtually impossible for him and all the many other excellent American coaches to have any constructive imput or activity into the development of our programs... then justifying this unacceptable public display by blaming others for the problems. I don't think this is the way the USOC has ruled we should behave as NGB.





    Post of the decade there, thank you.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    767
    I believe the NAA has posted a response to Record Keepers letter to Brad Camp. You can see it at usarchery.org
    Remember Adam and Jamie
    "Why worry about a miss when you know you can hit?"

  23. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Glass View Post
    I believe the NAA has posted a response to Record Keepers letter to Brad Camp. You can see it at usarchery.org
    Post #28 announced that fact already. But thanks anyway for reminding us.
    University of California
    Retiree
    Former Coach

  24. #49
    has anyone at nationals gotten any feed back?

  25. #50
    I can't argue with anything you said. I do, however, want to clarify some stuff from my view as a prior member of the board because I do believe the NAA tries its best to be as transparent as it can be. Now, that might sound like more politics; but it's true. There are many things that occur day-to-day in any organization (or business) that the general membership need not be made aware of lest some members try to micro manage the organization. It's like a tournament, and I speak from experience of having run the Indoor Nationals in Andover for eight years and one Outdoor JOAD Nationals, many problems pop up behind the scenes but you handle them as quickly and efficiently as possible, and never let them influence the athletes. From the front it seems like the tournament ran smoothly. That being said, the office can only do so much. The true face of the NAA (and the problem) is the elected regional representatives and the committee chairs and it's members, and here is where the system begins to fail. With a few exceptions, our elected representatives only act as such when the board meets twice a year. Trying to get a return call or email any other time is like "pulling teeth". We never hear from committee chairs and/or their regional representatives either. Wouldn't it be nice if your regional JOAD rep contacted all the clubs in your area and offered assistance in training on how to grow your club, or even asked for suggestions (paying a visit to the area once a year would of course be asking too much)? How about the membership director calling the members at random to inquire how the NAA could better serve them and their family? I could go on and on with examples. As the first (and short lived) director of membership and resource development (the original name of the committee), I was told by our then Presdent that you could not resonably expect that kind of effort out of a volunteer network or require state associations to do things like progress reports, hold tournaments, or even require loyality to the NAA. When I disagreed with him, I was canned for "not being a team player". The attitude continues today, and has gotten worse. According to my sources, JOAD's new Star program was still being evualated by the committee when Lloyd gave the contract to NADA. This caused a lot of tension. How about asking the member clubs if they would like a change? Sorry, that would entail a certain degree of effort from the regional representative that cannot be expected. Or how about a senior officer of the NAA going to an event on NAA funding but representing equipment manufacture(s) once he got there? That's a good one! He didn't even wear an NAA pin at least. Or, how about going to Germany on an NAA ticket representing Archery Focus without the NAA being reimbursed by Archery Focus for that ticket (the ticket was purchased in his name earlier when he was an officer of the NAA).
    Farming out the management of the JOAD program means that the committee has reduced authority (if any) over the program. Lloyd gave it away for a piece of the pie. Our NAA Level 1 & 2 instructor program no longer belongs to us. The manual has been changed so much that I doubt our copyright would be enforceable if push come to shove. I'm so glad the NADA has to hire more employees because their growing (using our materials and smart business planning - things the NAA should have had the foresight to do) so quickly.
    So now, under this new arrangement with the USOC, we are going to give direct control of the Board to those very committees because only the members of group can vote within their group, and if you belong to more than one, you have to choose your loyality. How stupid can we be.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Threads about the NAA Grassroots College Director
    By RecordKeeper in forum F.I.T.A, N.A.A., Collegiate Archery, And J.O.A.D.
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 20th, 2007, 10:34 AM
  2. VDGIF director fired by board
    By BigBirdVA in forum Legislation and Hunting Rights
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 4th, 2007, 07:10 PM
  3. USA Archery Board of Directors Elections - JOAD (Leader) Director Voting
    By Serious Fun in forum F.I.T.A, N.A.A., Collegiate Archery, And J.O.A.D.
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: November 11th, 2007, 10:58 PM
  4. New NAA Board
    By Steven Cornell in forum F.I.T.A, N.A.A., Collegiate Archery, And J.O.A.D.
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 31st, 2007, 09:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •