We are becoming so politically correct etc in everything we try to do.
Chief Judges have every right to bounce some one out of an event if they are doing anything to "harass or influence judges" in any shape or form.
Clubs have the right to deny entry based on past history of an entrant in relationship to a club or group of clubs in a given region.
The clubs have every right to stipulate criteria for entry such as not accepting judged entries after a specified date for example and stick to their criteria.
I personally think the short time the delegates spend on real world issues at the AGM would be better spent by not following further on this issue and let the clubs deal with things themselves.
UJCNA directors and others serve as a service to others and need to spend their time on more meaningful issues than dealing with the one situation in a thousand which may occur and trying to satisfy one individual.
The rules are set and have worked for the 20 years I have been involved, why make minute changes for situations unlikely to occur.
Submitted by rcmaury@bellso… on Sun, 02/07/2010 - 20:26
This seems to be a simple case of not understanding what the proposal is for. Maybe we need to make the wording clearer. The proposal will not keep you or any other club from keeping out anyone you want from any club event. There are certain people that should be kept out of some events and this does not change. The proposal does however come into play if the person who is rejected asks why and is not given a reason, he can then approach the Board who then approaches the club to find out why. The only problem will be if the club says nothing and does not respond. As it is now, there is no leverage to get an answer if the club does not want to give one. If your club does not have this problem, then you have nothing to worry about.