WIRES is just plain sad
- Details
- Published on Friday, 28 September 2012 08:31
In typical WIRES style, undated letters were sent to donors and others denying that WIRES had anything to do with anything ever. They still insist on claiming they have over 2000 members which is a wilful lie according to their own official returns.
rw.com and its supporters are mere "disaffected former members" - its not WIRES fault - we are just sucking on sour-grapes. They know full well not all of us are "former members". They welcome scrutiny and give over the accounts at every AGM - really? Your nose is growing Leanne! Didn't happen last year did it? So much for not fearing scrutiny. What Leanne was really trying to say is that WIRES never does anything wrong and any criticism, even when there's documentary evidence to prove WIRES are not fair, not honest and not transparent, is just nasty people trying to put everyone on a big downer. So you keep throwing all that money adminstration's way, won't you? - or Leanne will feel sad.
Oh, and by the way, the postcards were obviously from rw. So why would Leanne have need to authorise them? You see, its more of the slippery unsaid premise that WIRES is so good at.
Comments
Leanne Taylor working with a management committee elected by all members without the present manipulation by the board would do Wires proud. She treats everyone the same and is dedicated to wildlife care and animal rights. She should not be asked to try to clean up the mess created by the board and the previous Chair and his friends.
It is amazing that the boards have allowed the publication of the full names of the donors in the annual reports. I know that the donors were not asked to give their consent to this so it is a terrible breach of their privacy. Even the full name of a Family Court judge has been included and it is well known how careful these judges are to protect themselves from being identified. These reports were sent to anyone wanting information on Wires so the donors names have been made public for anyone to contact them using public records to get their address and phone number. Pity any donor who wanted to be private about giving or does not want to be pestered by other charities or conmen.
A reputable charity should know better than to release the names of its donors to the public and would protect their privacy.
Why can Leanne not make known to members her reason for censuring them? Why does she not have the decency to speak or communicate when she has a question to be answered?. Why does she refuse to forward a volunteer a copy of the persons records held by wires? Why does she not authorise requests sent out to purchase wires Xmas cards don't tell me that she is going to blame Reformwires for that indiscretion as well.
The source of this letter is easily checked. All wires have to do is call on their private detective. Rather than make up stories to cover her indiscretion.
Ms Mason Consultant stated on 13.4.2011 that “Leanne was incompetent at communication and knows nothing about management (some friend) yet she is ok on computers”. They have (as advertised)a apposite relationship from Leanne’s past for many years. I was told personal information about many members and south branch were nominated as Making trouble. I knew for a fact that this was untrue. later that day I received the most bizarre phone call from Leanne. She was irritated. I am (was) a Donor. I terminated the conversation as it clearly had others listening in trying to comment.
Leanne also later caused the loss of a well respected member from South branch because she did not like their TONE when it was pointed out to her the problems that she was ignoring and disguising. Problems that she was also causing for members in the field and unnecessary suffering by wildlife. Leanne hid behind the Board while the board hid behind belligerence and denial of constitutional rights.
If Leanne was a good manager she would not be scared to stand up to the Board after all she has every right to is paid to and is (unlike volunteers) protected from persecution. She also has Reformwires to support her if she is persecuted for doing her job as a responsible manager. Leanne also has the membership to reach out to and fair trading. (unlike volunteers). It makes my day to see Leanne having to defend herself and I wish her all the lack of cooperation and rights of reply that she stands back and watches as members and wildlife suffer.
From my perspective it seems that.
1 Leanne was not coping from the start.
2 Leanne has used the board to intimidate anybody who became aware of her incompetence.
3 Sucked up to the board just to keep her job. She was prepared to sacrifice decent members to save her butt.
4 The board kept her on because she can be manipulated as their WIRElesS remote guillotine
5 The board now need to keep her on because she knows to much.
6 Leanne knows why certain members were persecuted and is now in a position to dominate the board as she has the files of Reformwires to support her. The members to support her and they are all really pissed off about the waste and squandering of wildlife funds for rescue and caring.
7 The Board are literally packing their nappy's. Since a dissatisfied member used their private donations to begin an investigation of the Board members and management.
8 The smell of litigation has recently begun to divide the Board as they prepare to defend themselves and their possessions as they get picked off one by one as each tries to defend their indiscretions. and blame it on their peers and others.
9 From my knowledge of how the board get things done. I have no doubt that Leanne is being set up to discredit her and remove her in such a way that she will have to keep her knowledge to herself. (watch this space).
Wonder if she is allowed to see the board minutes.
What Campaign the campign to divulge the names of donors?
Wires either sent it or they did not. A simple note stating that this was not authorised by Wires. Would be sufficient then nominate who sent it.
Who is the group of dissatisfied former members.
I think wires protest to much.
Why is their dissatisfied former members forming a group.
I am aware that a donor has contacted Leanne about an unauthorised email to donors about Xmas cards. Who sent that. It has no name or signature.
How did a donor who was not on the list of the annual reports 2007-2010 recently get a copy??? Their name was not on those lists????
Leanne has offered the opportunity to contact her. She does not offer a reply. let's contact her and see what happens.
so we shouldn't be all that surprised