re: An Open Letter to the Bikerowave

[Dan/R]

Moderator's Note:

The moderator has decided to repost the following open letter on the Bikerowave forum.

The post was originally removed at the request of volunteers who felt misrepresented.

In the interest of transparency and openness, however, we believe it is better to repost the letter as taken from the Midnight Ridazz forum.  At the request of several volunteers we have removed all names (except that of the author).

To the members of the Bikerowave:

As many of you know, I've been living in Canada since late last year; and as some of you know I was banned from volunteering shortly before leaving town. I chose not to fight to stay a part of this organization at the time, and I have long regretted it. I first began volunteering when the Bikerowave was still at its original location. My contributions include that little box of index cards which you guys use to file all the project bikes, and helping numerous people get riding. I'm proud of the work that I did as part of the Bikerowave. Today I'm on the board of directors at a co-op here in Vancouver, and I often find myself wondering what happened at the Bikerowave to make myself so unwelcome. I have never before felt as if a group of people believed me to be so deeply flawed, and my closest friends at the Bikerowave cannot make sense of it either. What happened has left me feeling deeply hurt and betrayed, but more than anything, I feel confused that things had gone so wrong.

I wish I had been given a chance to speak, but of course, I hadn't been notified of the meeting. I had asked **** a number of times to reinstate my membership on the forum, only to be deleted a few days later. Sensing the futility in trying to deal with ****, I contented myself to simply volunteering once a week, and not getting involved. If my membership was in question, I would have had several volunteers to vouch for me. But the question of my membership was added to the agenda at the last minute, in blatant violation of the bylaws.* My friends were not informed of the meeting, and my girlfriend and I were not invited, even though we were both members in good standing. Even though you had both of our phone numbers. Whether I was a member in good standing at the time may have been in question, but there was no question that ****, **** or many others were. And none of them had a chance to speak for me.

I feel I often went well beyond what was expected of members. I cared about my community and I wanted to make sure that people who needed our services got in touch with us. On the occasion in question, I came in with a friend on members only day. I had been trying to get him to come in for weeks to put a brake on his bike, and the day before he was almost hit by a car. Since I was a member, I offered to fix his bike for him and let him watch. I told **** what I was doing, and she insisted that I wasn't a member either, and that I had no right to be there.

**** had said the same thing to my girlfriend a couple of weeks ago and had been very rude to her as well, insisting she wasn't a member. I told her that I volunteered on Tuesdays, to which she replied “no you don't!” I felt this was unbelievably rude and condescending, and not wanting to get into a childish argument, I asked her to talk to ****, believing he was the authority on such matters. She continued to follow me around, ignoring what I had said. I was worried that my friend would be ashamed to come back, so I told him to ignore her while we put the brake on his bike. **** continued to hover and yell at us, and I simply continued to ask: “talk to ****.” As I worked, she got increasingly erratic. Frankly, I found her behavior to be completely outrageous and out-of-line. I could see why my girlfriend had been so upset over the way she had been treated, and I felt the same way.

A couple of days later, I was surprised to receive a phone call from **** explaining that I was banned from volunteering. I had been given no opportunity to speak for myself or even to ask my friends to speak for me. I can assure you all that at least five people were shocked and told me that they would have voted in my favor if they had only known.

I'm not asking to be reinstated. I'm not asking to have anything to do with the Bikerowave. I live three states and a province away from you all, and I can assure you that I will probably not step foot in the Bikerowave ever again. I just want to know why. You see, it just doesn't make sense to me. I thought the Bikerowave was there to serve the community. I thought we didn't turn people away for lack of funds. I thought I was honoring ****, **** and ****, and the spirit they brought to this place when they founded it. I believed in that spirit. And this sad event has deeply challenged and marred that belief. I've been told by several people that some of you had made statements against me in confidence. I ask, I beg that you please make those statements public. I believe it is only right that we live our lives in the full light of day, so that we can all learn and be wiser from what has happened.

If any of you who were there would like to talk privately, you can reach me at en4ne1*g****.***. Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Sincerely,
He Who Shall Not Be Named Marjoribanks

*see the section titled "Announcement"

[iain]

Thank you for allowing me this chance to address you all.  I look forward to hearing from you. 

If any of you feel offended or maligned by anything that I have said, I would like to sincerely apologise.  I only have my faulty memory, and my own biased perspectives to share with you.  If I have not seen myself, or any of you, clearly, then I humbly apologise, and ask that you share with me your perspective. 

It's not my intention to embarrass anyone, or this organisation.  I only want a chance to hear from you all why you felt the need to force me out of the Bikerowave, why I wasn't given a chance to speak, and why my friends and supporters--fellow members--were excluded from the meeting? 

I was also very shocked that the membership saw fit to ignore the open meetings clause of the bylaws, and this has probably disturbed me more than anything over the past year. 

I have only questions, and I have no intention of starting any quarrel.  You're all entitled to see things differently than me, and fully respect that.  I only want to hear what you have to say. 

Thank you all, 
He Who Shall Not Be Named

[Siku]

 I have to say that I was shocked and surprised when this open letter was posted and this topic was brought up again!? I guess that after a year I believed that both parties would have come to some form of maturity about this incident and let sleeping dogs lie.

However, what shocked me even more was the fact that the Bikerowave decided to remove the open letter and discuss the matter on the private forum of this board, and then repost it as if no one had an opinion on the subject at all ("it will quickly get buried! ...ingore him...” were many of the comments on the private thread! * I'm sure that even mentioning the private thread discussion will get my post removed too! I might even be banned all together... sigh*). Again, this is not transparency, it is the same collusion that created this mess to begin with. 

I have been an avid volunteer for over 10 years, from Boston to DC to LA, and yes Vancouver. I love to volunteer, because I love to help. I even help kids from off the streets to give them hope in life. This is what I do. I'm a good person, and so are all of you. I call many of you friends (including He Who Shall Not Be Named, who posted the open letter)! 

And I too hope things have changed since I last volunteered at the Bikerowave a year ago. I hope this open letter doesn't reflect the Bikerowave in it's current incarnation. I hope that volunteers are respectful of each other and patrons. I hope that the management and members have learned that the Bikerowave is more helpful as an inclusive entity rather than exclusive one. I hope that everyone has learned how to work together instead of against each other. I hope that this matter can be settled once and for all!

I believe myself a peacemaker, a patient individual who knows that we all aren't perfect and that we all make mistakes, and yes we all can be forgiven too. But I realize now that I have bitten my tongue much to often when it comes to Bikerowave’s lack of professionalism. I was helping to hide it’s dirty secrets in order to maintain peace, and not ruffle the massive egos that paraded around. Why? Because I knew that the Bikerowave in the community is much more important the the sum of it’s dysfunctional parts.

 I was willing to put up with the discord, elitism, favoritism, squabbles, general rudeness, and neighboring “beefs” to help my community.  I convinced myself that the Bikerwave was “young” and would mature with age. Even at the times when I felt unwanted and discouraged by managers and members, I pushed on. I prided myself because I did it with a smile (most of the time).  I pushed on because I believed Bikerowave was destined to be a great community center, and I still do.

He Who Shall Not Be Named came to this forum seeking an understanding of what went sooooo wrong just one year ago. I can understand that. He loved the Bikerowave, and rightly so expected more form it as a community organization. I, like many of you, will agree that He Who Shall Not Be Named’s actions on that fateful day were unprofessional and rude, but what can you expect when a culture of rudeness and unprofessionalism was so prevalent at the Bikerowave? Like a neglectful parent and a confused child. How could He Who Shall Not Be Named have known that what he did was soooooooo wrong?

Now he comes here, one year later, asking for clarity and sub-textually forgiveness, and his open letter is treated as if his grievances with the Bikerowave are foolish and his crimes unforgivable? REALLY???

I know that many of you who find yourself “included” in the Bikerowave will find my voice biased. I assure you it is not. None of this fighting makes me happy. I know it makes no one happy. I know He Who Shall Not Be Named as a kind and sincere person and we all know he is no danger to the community physically or otherwise. There are much larger and harmful voices affiliated with the Bikerowave that have been coddled for way too long (out of fear, perhaps? I don't know). I do know that while this childish bickering lingers there is no real healing. I know that both sides are so very wrong and are afraid to admit it.

I know it is said that He Who Shall Not Be Named had a fair chance to defend himself. His judgement was passed and the sentence enforced. I know he was notified/invited afterwards to speak and defend himself. The decision was already made, and there was no way to turn back time.  I know that a year later after so much “pain” Bikerowave's bylaws have remained the same, yet to be amended as proposed a year ago. There is no change! There is one voice on the private thread that seemed to speak with sanity. One voice that seemed to have realized the mistake on behalf of the Bikerowave. He asked for a formal policy in the bylaws be added to include how do handle a disciplinary actions with members, volunteers, etc. I think that is a good idea. I think it's about time these issues are duly addressed. Otherwise, the decision "process" reeks of collusion.

To this day, I have seen no formal apologizes from either sides and that is a shame. I hope that will change very soon. I think we can only grow from the mistakes we are willing to own up to.

With that... I know Bikerowave has yet to mature. I also know that there has been many other people who have worked with the Bikerowave who share my opinions on the dysfunction.  Not one, or two, or a few, but many who walked away feeling confused. (Don’t worry BRW’s public reputation still looks great online, if that is all that matters.)  And as much as there is a desire to brush this matter away as a blip on the radar, I believe history has a funny way of repeating itself with the BRW.

Sorry for the long rant, and the typos. I guess it’s been a long time coming.

Peace & love,
Siku

P.S. - I know He Who Shall Not Be Named has never posted on Yelp under any name but his own. He’s no coward (i.e. the open letter)  So, let’s kill the ill will, yeah? Especially if bridges of peace are going to be built.

[iain]

Dear members,

The Bikerowave has a lot of great members.  I support you and the great work you do.  I'm simply asking you to abide by your own bylaws, like posting the (complete) agenda a week in advance, especially with matters regarding other members. 

When I was removed, there was no notice, besides a cryptic post asking it to be added the day before, and as a result, none of the members I worked with were at the meeting where I was banned.  I also feel you were misled to believe that I had never been a member.  At least that's what Steve said.  The second screenshot from the private section proves otherwise. 

The Bikerowave is only as good an organisation as you make it.  Certainly, I'm for anything that gets more people on bikes, but what about openness, hearing diverse opinions and social justice?  I think the steps you're now taking are great, and I support you in your reforms. 

If you're going to act like an exclusive club, you're not a community co-op, you're just just a volunteer bike shop.  That's not a bad thing, but I believe the steps you're now taking will make the Bikerowave a better organisation moving forward.  And I think that's something that all members past, present and future deserve from you.

Kudos,
He Who Shall Not Be Named

........................................

I wrote this letter because I wanted to know what happened, and I got those answers, however unwillingly, from the membership.  I'm posting this now because I want the community to know the importance of paying attention to co-op governance and holding these organisations responsible to the communities they serve. 

[Alex Thompson]

If you're going to act like an exclusive club...

You presume that your experience is that of others.  More likely, your experience is the exception that proves the rule.  We've had at least 172 volunteers at Bikerowave, and only 3 times has a volunteer or applicant been asked to leave.

I agree that the process was not ideal, but I also think that the decision that the membership arrived at - that you would not be invited to continue as a volunteer - was in large part due to your own actions.  You may argue that this person or that person wasn't welcoming to you, but in the end, when the collective opinion of your behavior was very negative, that suggests that your behavior may have been a problem.

I've yet to see you acknowledge that.

[iain]

Alex,

Respectfully, I presume nothing.  Talking to the people that know me best, some of whom are former members, I get a much different picture from the one you paint.  So, while I appreciate your perspective, I ask that you take a moment to see things through my eyes.

When you voted me out, you lost three volunteers who were so disgusted with the membership that they no longer wanted to be a part of your organisation.  I wish you'd keep track of those numbers too, because I can count at least seven among my friends, between 2008 and 2010, who left disgruntled with the politics of the membership.  It's one reason I never got involved in voting. 

Over the past year, I've come to better understand power relations in consensus-based decision making.  When you say "collective opinion," I remind you that this excluded a lot of strong, contrasting opinions.  I believe it was easier for the members who barely knew me to believe a story told by someone they saw often.  I feel it was easier to sympathise with someone who was speaking in front of them than someone who wasn't.  I believe that these decisions were made in the shadows because they wouldn't have stood up to the light of day. 

I may have been dismissive when speaking to Raina, but considering the abusive way she treated me and my girlfriend in the previous weeks, I felt I was being calm and appropriate.  The next day, I was voted out by the members I had worked with the least, or not at all.  How could that be fair? Furthermore, what I've read leads me to believe that the members with the most sway misled the core membership who showed up to vote on this last-minute item. 

I'm sorry, but I just can't agree that what I did justified my being banned.  If I had been allowed to speak, and then chastised, then perhaps I could have drawn attention to the way my girlfriend and I were being treated, and put a stop to it.  But it was clear that our opinions weren't valued.  We weren't valued.  I worked hard when I was volunteering.  I believed that earned me the respect of those around me.  I worked Tuesdays so I could volunteer with people I biked.  These volunteers didn't get a voice in this process, either.  This wouldn't have happened if their right to notice had been respected. 

I've yet to hear the Bikerowave admit to violating its own bylaws.  There are deeper implications to this. You--with your understanding of politics--of all people should appreciate this!  If I was so fundamentally wrong, why was it necessary to make these decisions in the shadows?  You've seen from your political career that the worst things come out of secret meetings where opposing opinions aren't welcomed.  Please embrace your bylaws, and raise this organisation above reproach.  If you really believe this was not how this should have gone down, do something to make sure it doesn't happen again. 

I hope you keep these questions in mind as you move forward.  I hope that in the future, the membership will place supremacy on the bylaws, and not their own fallible human judgement.  If nothing else, I am just a humble reminder of our human fallibility.  And I believe that we can all agree upon that. 

I sincerely wish you all the best.
He Who Shall Not Be Named

[enzomatic]

be that as it may, the member meetings are the same day and time every month (with few exceptions), we have to have quorum so that a decision is representative at least to those who feel interested enough in the decisions and direction of the bikerowave to show up to the meetings, in your case you were given a chance to speak to the members to defend yourself and your actions (you say you didn't partially because the decision was already made, but any decision at the bikerowave could just as easily be unmade by the same voting process), you forfeited the chance you were given to do so, you could have easily planted the meeting with your supporters (if they were current voting members) and it would have been moot, you could have offered some form or reconciliation or asked for a probationary period instead of being banned, you could have done a lot of things that you chose not to do.
The vote was made by a representational amount of the bikerowave's voting members, enough of them had felt that it was difficult to work along side of you or that you weren't pulling your weight or whatever they felt to vote for you to not be a volunteer anymore. I'd like to note again that you weren't banned from using our space as a community member.

[iain]

" you could have easily planted the meeting with your supporters (if they were current voting members) "

like i said, the people i actually worked with at the bikerowave didn't know that i was going to be discussed at the meeting.  the bylaws are pretty clear that the agenda must be posted a week in advance, but it seems that you don't care about the rights of dissenting members. 

your response reflects the us vs. them mentality of the bikerowave better than i possibly could.  

[enzomatic]

" you could have easily planted the meeting with your supporters (if they were current voting members) "

like i said, the people i actually worked with at the bikerowave didn't know that i was going to be discussed at the meeting.  the bylaws are pretty clear that the agenda must be posted a week in advance, but it seems that you don't care about the rights of dissenting members.  

your response reflects the us vs. them mentality of the bikerowave better than i possibly could.  

i meant at the following meeting where you were given a chance to speak your case, the one you chose not to attend, you had the chance to get the people you spoke of as being those that support you (not us v. them, the people you said would support you) to show up and bring up your reinstatement as an agenda item, you could have made your case and they could have brought something up to a vote. You would have had 1 month to know about this and prepare. The bikerowave is a fluid place like that. That's all part of the checks and balances and that's part of what makes this place great, it's always changing.