I'm posting this on the Forum with B. Jan's permission - Tim Roberts
B. Jan wrote:
On December 20th, I received a curt email from the ABC Chairman telling me that he’d called a special meeting and that 3 members of the Board had voted to fire me. There were no reasons given for my termination, but I suspect that it had something to do the editorial below.
It was supposed to appear in the January issue of Airmail, but when I received my copy, it was blacked out. So was a commentary from from Board member Tim Roberts making similar points. In 31 years of publishing, this is the first time material in Airmail has been censored.
My editorial was inspired by the Chairman’s December article in which he wrote, “...every Board member is interested in your view and would love to hear from you. Your opinion matters. Your ideas are welcome.”
So here’s how I responded;
"Vote Now or Forever Hold your Peace!
by B. Jan
Most readers have seen the appeals for feedback in recent Airmails and wondered what it’s all about.
Essentially, the 5 member ABC Board is split on where to take the club in future. It appears that both sides are genuinely interested in the welfare of the ABC, but disagree on how to manage it.
Three Board members (the Trio) argue that we must grow or die. They’ve expressed concern over the club’s financial future in light of increasing printing and shipping costs and shrinking membership. Although our treasury is currently larger than at any time in the club’s history (almost $80K), they seek to preserve this edge through changes like a digital version of Airmail and a dues increase.
They also insist that Airmail must change in order to appeal to a younger demographic, which they assume will grow our membership.
Two members (the Duo) just don’t understand that. They don’t see much interest from the Millennial generation in maintenance-intensive motorcycles which went out of production before the majority were born. They argue that most have never even heard of airheads -- let alone desire one -- and feel that altering the club to appeal to this demographic would only make sense if airheads were still in production.
They urge the Board to leave Airmail alone as it is the only benefit most members receive — the fact that they keep renewing indicates they are essentially satisfied with it. To risk alienating our base is counter-productive.
They say that our website, not Airmail, is the ideal place to broaden our club’s appeal. What better place to attract a contemporary demographic than on a contemporary medium? If that hasn’t worked in the past, changes should be made to the site, not to Airmail.
As the founder of the ABC, I’ve put more blood, sweat, and tears into it than anyone else and no one wants it to last more than I do.
But I’m a pragmatist.
When the fans of classic British motorcycles faded away, so did their bike clubs. No-one believed that modifying their magazine or diluting their club with other models would stem this tide, and no-one sought to blame any individual for natural attrition.
Instead, they extended the life of their organizations by focusing on satisfying their existing clientele.
Because of that, I got to enjoy several events with these clubs as a youth. What impressed me was that such divergent folks could be brought together simply by the appreciation of a common motorcycle.
The ABC has been more successful and enduring than most of the British bike clubs it emulated. That’s due to the hard work of the many remarkable people who’ve made happen. It has enriched my life immeasurably and that of many others. We’d like that to continue for as long as possible.
So does the Duo on the Board. They fear that radical changes will shorten rather than extend the life of our club. They believe this Board was elected to cater to our existing membership, not to some hypothetical group of future prospects.
The Trio, on the other hand, insists that much of our current membership is unhappy and believe they have a mandate to transform our club into something they’d prefer, which includes editorial censorship and the elimination of Oak’s material.
Consequential decisions like this should NOT be made by 3 members of a Board. Non-profit organizations are owned by the membership and such decisions should be made by the membership at large.
This is why it’s so important for you to make your wishes known to the Board at BoD@airheads.org (Votes sent to this address will reach ALL Board members, which assures a more accurate tally.)
In the subject line of your email, simply write whether you agree with the Duo or the Trio. (Longer explanations seem to create confusion.) Please include your ABC number if you want your vote to count?
Should you fail to vote, the decision will fall to the Trio.”
If our Chairman genuinely believes that the membership’s “opinion matters”, then why did he suppress a call for it and fire the editor who wrote it?
In a non-profit corporation, the Board should respond to, not squash the wishes of the membership. What’s the real agenda of the “Trio”?
A few days ago, Board Member Tim Hille advised that the BoD@airheads.org address is “not reliable”, and required members wishing to address the Board to write each member individually. Airmarshals have been complaining that the airhead.org addresses have been problematic lately and no-one seems to know why.
To me, this feels like the Joe Cuda fiasco all over again.
I agree with the trio. I am in favor of getting a new editor for Airmail.
Celia Williams, Flairhead
I agree with the majority of the BoD to move on to a new editor. And in the case of expanding appreciation of our old tech motorcycles to a younger generation I direct you to their interest in preserving and even resurrecting such nearly moribund technology as Polaroid cameras, vinyl records and turntables, letterpress, and film photography. Have a look at www.boxermetal.com Gasp, these bikes are modified, but so is my bike with its Katdash. Modified or maintained, If we do it right we will be passing on a legacy of loved motorcycles to the next generations of riders who have gotten to know us. Better to pass on the keys of a daily rider with whatever kind of polish or patina it has. When we welcome more people in by sharing our expertise instead of grumbling to ourselves about digitization we can put even more Airheads (mechanical and human) on the road. The membership has an extraordinary depth and breadth of knowledge and enthusiasm for a bike that is intrinsically durable, quirky, and fixable. Let’s go.
It’s great when people share their views. The more, the better. The membership isn’t required to vote on this decision by the board. We empowered the board by ratifying the by-laws. In addition I thought the vote of the board was 3-1 with 1 board member quitting. When I “vote” for a new editor I’m voting for an editorial policy that reflects the entirety of the club. I would even hope that the expertise of B.Jan wouldn’t be silent in forthcoming Airmails.
Linda Cicero
#16117
I am of the same mind as Linda wrt commentary vs editorial expertise. I think B Jan’s commentary is shite, but I like every other aspect of the magazine he produces. Just cut out the soapbox part and keep the rest, including the editor.
as far as the Oak question, makes no real difference to me. It’s usually interesting reading.
As far as attracting a new generation of airhead riders, I don’t think we need to modernize. People who love these old bikes don’t require everything to be digitized.
Eric Zwicky
13780
Richmond VA
I tend to look at matters in as simple terms as possible, and I do think there is a “flip side” to the Airmail situation. This stems from a confession I need to make. Quite long ago B.Jan asked me to contribute a story for the Airmail. He asked if I’d write about my long 42 year “relationship” with my airhead. It’s the only BMW I’ve had since I was 25. He wanted some photos of “us” along the way, some technical tidbits, and highlights of our adventures. Sure, I can do that! … and, I NEVER DID. I went silent. So, folks who want something new, I think need to realize that new content will need to come from us, the membership. I don’t want to debate whether B.Jan wrote “inflammatory” pieces. I do think he had quite a challenging project on his hands, to fill a magazine with suitable content, month after month. Maybe he wandered off course here and there, but we, the membership, have been depending on him to fill a lot pages on his own as well. To fulfill the dream of a shiny new Airmail, we are all going to have to pitch in. I need sit down and write the piece Mr. Hoffman asked me to contribute long ago.
My concern (shock) is less with the editorial issues than with the way it was handled, and is still being handled, by the current board. There is still no direct contact from them to us - especially as they knew they were being criticized prior to this behind closed doors- they knew they were (are) stirring the pot but refuse to respond. Why?
Further, I am to start attending the meetings and see for myself what the hell is going on, since they won’t open up to us.
Either by zoom or in person how does the membership participate in the proceedings? Or are we the members now excluded??
I, for one, do not trust anything or anyone that hides their actions when governing others. So please be transparent to instill confidence to the masses
Ed Adams
16830
My concern (shock) is less with the editorial issues than with the way it was handled, and is still being handled, by the current board. There is still no direct contact from them to us - a relayed letter saying they didn’t like the content and therefore censored the editor is not enough of an explanation as to the WAY this was initiated. And especially concerning as they knew they were being criticized about their actions when behind closed doors- they KNOW they were (are) stirring the pot but refuse to respond. Why?
Why were we NOT advised/notified by the board? Why are all these issues suddenly so big that board members quit due to being bullied out??
There is a HUGE lack of connection with the board and the members- WHY?
There is no communication- even now -
WHY??
Further, as there seems to be intentional and purposeful lack of PUBLIC representation. I am to going start attending the meetings and see for myself what the hell is going on, since they won’t open up to us.
Either by zoom or in person how does the membership participate in the proceedings? Or are we the members now excluded??
I, for one, do not trust anything or anyone that hides their actions when governing others. So please be transparent to instill confidence to the masses
Ed Adams
16830
The "they changed the bod@ email thing" is nothing but a huge misunderstanding. I could write a long technical treatise on why airheads.org emails are "unreliable", but nobody would read it. The short version is this: "airheads.org" does not run a "proper" mail server. We only pay for a minimal email presence. This presence only allows us to do simple forwarding of emails, so "bod@airheads.org" is a simple forward of any messages received to the five email addresses of the board members. Unfortunately, due to anti-spam measures by all the email providers (gmail, aol, yahoo, etc. etc.), these messages are rejected by those providers, since they look "fishy", because they *say* they come from "some-user@juno.com", but they originate from "airheads.org", and this is a "red flag". So these email forwards are unreliable, because the emails may never reach the intended recipient.
The "web team" (really, the IT team) are trying to figure out a way to fix this, which will probably end up changing the bod@ address to something else, but no changes have been made. I repeat, NO CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE. bod@airheads.org still exists, and still works, sort-of. It's nobody's fault that it's unreliable, it just is, and it's beyond our ability to fix it.
Those claiming some sort of bad behaviour in "changing the bod@airheads.org address" are full of it. It hasn't been changed, it just doesn't work very well.
Bill Dudley
If this is the correct forum to post our personal thoughts on this matter, here's my dos centavos.
I remember the Joe Cuda incident well and the bad taste it left. It's hard enough recruiting new members without a new brouhaha discouraging potential new blood.
A decision of this magnitude should have been decided by a publication of intent for a couple of months, and then a vote of the Airmarshals after soliciting a consensus of their members. The fact that B. Jan's cogent response was not published doesn't sit well with me.
The Oak prohibition is a thorny one, and was certainly his to make. However I'm not sure restricting his content to print really helps the longevity of the Club and the issue of recruitment of new members.
There are a select few of professional shop owners, such as Tom Cutter, Bud Provin, Anton Lagardier, Ted Porter, Dave Alquist, Greg Hutchinson and others, that could hopefully provide new Tech content. In lieu of payment, perhaps a barter system of exchanging linked ads on Airheads.org and in the Airmail might prove to be an incentive to provide their expertise?
Offered humbly with respect and gratitude to B. Jan, the BoD, the Airmarshals and all the volunteers that have made our Club what it has been.
W. Doyle Smith
7596
I got my January Airmail on 12/30. I am concerned about what is happening to the club with the direction you are going. There is a lot you need to explain if you want to be transparent in your guidance of the club. From my perspective, this board needs to resign.
1. Blacking out the printed material in this latest issue is censorship at its worse. What was written there that scared you so much that it had to be covered up? Was there truth being reported that you could not let the general membership see because it was against what you were doing behind the membership’s back? Was it an opinion piece by the editor? Was it a travel story? No matter what it was, it is unacceptable for the membership to see blank areas in our club magazine. The board needs to resign because of this censorship.
2. I understand that B. Jan, the Airmail editor and a founder of the club, has been fired by a 3-person board member majority without any explanation to the membership. This action was HIGHLY improper by the board. 8 years ago, I was fired by a 3-person board majority the same way. They learned that that action was improperly done and came to regret it. What were the circumstances that led to the board’s decision to do that? Why was it not communicated to the Airmarshals before any cation was taken? The yes or no responses from the Airmarshals to a proper explanation of both sides of any problem, should have been your guide as to the desires of the membership. I understand that no such survey was done, which would have been easily accomplished since you can easily send an e-mail to all Airmarshals at one time. That would have been a proper method to use and provide transparency for your actions. That is only one example of your illegal/improper action. I leave it up to you to research what else you failed to consider by your action. This board should resign because of this illegal action after reinstating the editor.
3. When this board took over, Duck, the chairman who I considered to be a levelheaded and good person to lead the club, asked me to send him all the revised bylaw information I had worked on. These are recommendations made by highly interested and motivated members to prevent a repeat of what happened to Jim Howland & I in 2014 as well as bring the bylaws into the 21st century so they could be guidance for the club for another 25 plus years. I note that nothing of value has been done on this multiple member effort since the board took over. At one point, I was told the information was filed in a file cabinet and not reviewed.
I will also post this e-mail to the airheads.org website for those interested members to see and comment if they have any interest.
David Cushing
ABC # 7506
I joined the ABC in 1997 and was the Montana Airmarshall for a few years, until my work / life intervened and I was unable to give any attention to the position. I DO see that updating a Clubs mantra to fit current trends could be beneficial, but taking steps to eventually cancel the physical "Airmail" is a grave mistake in my opinion. "Airmail" is the sole publication that I still receive and feel it is intregal to the organization. In my 20+ years I've recruited untold new members by simply passing on a used "Airmail". I don't think giving someone a "Link" will have the same affect. But it appears that a "Majority" is in control and will apparently take the Club in whatever direction they prefer. Good luck with your decision. If firing the Editor without due transparency is the path of the future, I don't have much faith in the Clubs future. But that's just my opinion, which obviously holds no weight. Apparently the "Majority" knows what's best for all of us. I truly hope the Club will survive with your new direction.
Doug Smith
#1992
Instead, they extended the life of their organizations by focusing on satisfying their existing clientele.
Well, that approach is not working too well for Harley. 😉
I would not mind a digital Airmail (in addition to the paper one), even if Oak's stuff was only on paper. As for millennials (or whatever you call people younger than about 60), I sure get a lot of "kids" admiring my /5 and saying they would like to have one. Many people of whatever age like to tinker and there's only so much tinkering you can do on a Hyabusa.
It does sound to me the BoD (the old one or whatever new guys make a successful coup) need to become more transparent so this sort of crap stops. There is no reason BoD meetings can't be broadcast on Zoom with everyone muted except the members of the Board. We get to see and watch and, perhaps, go off and post our reactions on the ABC forum.
-John ABC#5556
Been riding airheads now for 41 years.
One thing you can count on: cult of personality and big egos.
I just want to ride my motorcycle...
Reinstate B. Jan asap- May I never see another blacked out creepy authoritarian Airmail ever again. That was offensive and a complete embarrassment. I don't care how disagreeable the content was. Whoever scrolled the mouse over written words, blacked them out, and hit the print key should resign from the club.
Mike from NJ
Since the mode of opinion sharing is limited to a binary choice, let's get that out of the way first. I side with the Duo.
Should anyone be interested, here are my opinions regarding what I have read on the forums, and additional thoughts in my personal order of importance.
Maybe I'm thicker-skinned than most people, and can comfortably hear dissenting opinions. I can't understand how anyone would prevent information from being shared in a free society. My skin is thinnest where prodded by the influence of withheld information. If offended, stop reading, turn off the television, quit scrolling - it's your choice! When information is kept from you - that is someone else's choice, and I don't like it.
Binary choices are not the optimal way to get on with anything. 10mm or screwdriver....that's all you have, good luck.
The first thing I do when I open Airmail is to page to the back and read every Oak article that might apply to my R75/6. I skip the others, hoping to retain some nugget of relevant wisdom for my benefit in a future day of desperate need. But I know the odds will be against me on that day. I would love to have a sortable/indexed/web-accessed version of the compilation to find the help I might need. From what I have read that might never happen. There is an opportunity there for subscription-based access with a separate fee. I understand there's a lot to sort out to make that happen.
The "Renegades" stories are what I would read next. I don't know if they are autobiography, biography, or fiction, but I found them interesting. Maybe riding stories need 2 categories - biographical accounts and fiction. Fiction is fine as long as you realize that's what you are reading.
Then I scan the rest for things that catch my interest.
I like print. I'll pay for print. I read a paper 6 days a week that arrives in front of my house and a different paper on Sunday. I have an attention span. As the song goes "I ain't old but I been around a long time."
As Robert Fleischer said on the topic of the Snowbum website (from the 10/22 edition of Airmail) "I'm not unhappy, mad, etc., about the ABC......things are as they are in life, one deals with things as best one is able to".
Peace.
Advertisement
