MSA
I may be relaxed but I'm not drunk....
Sorry Lee, it's been hard to see the wood for the trees in this thread, but I'm sad it's reached this stage.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Uk400club 'list Of Lists' Etc Etc (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Johnny Allan
- Start date
- Status
Sorry Lee, it's been hard to see the wood for the trees in this thread, but I'm sad it's reached this stage.
marklhawkes
Well-known member
You missed 'face' - assuming I put them into the correct order!!
Jane Turner
Well-known member
Most likely! I was having enough trouble shuffling them.
Runcorn Birder
Well-known member
Jane is not the only person to lose 'face' in this whole sorry saga, although at least Jane's is only in a proverbial context.
Alan
Total madness Lee, why bother asking advice from anyone, the solution is so simple - just delete names of those who don't want to be on the list and be done with it.
You have yourself admitted that some of the lists are mere estimations, so they are pretty meaningless anyhow - by deleting these names, in reality all you would be doing is tidying up areas of inaccuracy on your list.
I simply can't fathom why you don't just back down for once - if not for the sake of those who want their names removed, then for yourself. The sheer pettiness of refusing to budge an inch reflects ever worse on you ...and given you operate tours and make a living from birding, etc, can this be in your interest?
As you know, I have absolutely no grudge against you, but you really are doing yourself no favours .
Last edited:
Jane
As I said to you before, I am not interested in maintaining a list if it doesn't (and lets say Steve Webb is correct in his intimations) have 5 or more of the Top 10 on it - waste of space, not worth it, and from all of this hypocrisy which its publication is attracting, it is far from worth wasting the effort on - particularly as I have never earnt a penny from it - and in terms of my birding business also, which is separate - I have never earnt in profit any more from the hobby than £573 since 6 June 1998 - hardly a living is it. My biggest earner in all of the time was showing people Lady Amherst's Pheasants - which was equally cut short by jealous individuals. The Club will cease existence as and when I am taken to court by the DPA, end of.
As I said to you before, I am not interested in maintaining a list if it doesn't (and lets say Steve Webb is correct in his intimations) have 5 or more of the Top 10 on it - waste of space, not worth it, and from all of this hypocrisy which its publication is attracting, it is far from worth wasting the effort on - particularly as I have never earnt a penny from it - and in terms of my birding business also, which is separate - I have never earnt in profit any more from the hobby than £573 since 6 June 1998 - hardly a living is it. My biggest earner in all of the time was showing people Lady Amherst's Pheasants - which was equally cut short by jealous individuals. The Club will cease existence as and when I am taken to court by the DPA, end of.
Jos, it is not a simple case of just taking names off a list. Steve Webb has made a formal complaint to the DPA about me and as such, it is common practise that they must follow it up whether he or I like it. It is the law. Both his and Johnny Allan's name were on the list and in the public domain and one of the Cheshire birders on this forum has somehow been getting access to what lies behind the UK400 Club door and that is currently forming part of the investigation
Jane Turner
Well-known member
Thought that the demise of the Pheasant population might have been the primary issue, or did I misinterpret - that. I'm sure you said recently that it had dwindled to a hybrid bird that you suggested people were ticking. (Hang on that another species for you on the skeptic list)
Seems strange that you put a few lines in a "meaningless" list above the club you created that clearly fulfills a need for a fair few people. Though I have to confess I'm not clear why you are raising the amount of money you have or have not made from the club as a reason not to comply with the Law.
Yes it is. At least, yes it was.
Last edited:
Bubolisting clearly caters for all of those individuals that wish to place their version of life lists in all of their entirety into the public domain - there is no point in me compiling the very same sort of list - it is meaningless and not representative of the true picture. Yes, there may be a relative few of my lists which may be well out but not many - and as many people have exclaimed, an awful lot of people are just not that bothered about the size of their list or even have a clue what it is - and even when I know their figures are wrong and attempt to clarify it, they just say they can't be bothered to work their way through the Master. I can't force anyone to give me their total - it's not a scientific piece of work
Jane, I'm not going into the ins and outs of the demise of the LAP tours on here - that's my business. The hybrid issue is one which resulted from the last individual I was attracting to one of my feeding stations - it was a sole survivor, a hybrid bird and was being ticked off by many that had been leaked the site as the real McCoy.....
I still have Lady A's to see - in fact four - but because of politics, I know longer take anyone to see them other than a very trusted few....
I still have Lady A's to see - in fact four - but because of politics, I know longer take anyone to see them other than a very trusted few....
Steve Webb
Well-known member
Lee,
I am not aware of the ICO taking court action against you yet. I would have thought if you take off the names and respective totals within the next few weeks then that would be the end of the matter and no court case.
You can create a new totals list provided you get permission from those who want to be on the list. I would expect this list to be a public place so its clear who is on the list.
Steve
black kite 1964
Well-known member
Lee. As I understand, the commission is not yet involved although if you continue to state your current position this wll be the only outcome left to follow.
At this stage there is no court action or mention of fines. Having said that, the commission will no doubt have powers for non compliance which will include financial penalties.
As for taking legal advice, that is clearly you right. I would suggest that you take that advice from a lawyer who is converse with the complex area of Data Protection Law. I understand that Paul Chapman is not a specialist in this area, so he may not as well informed as others specialising in this area of Law.
Notwithstanding the above Lee, I understand that the legal position has not changed in the last ten years. This means that the the commissions position (should its intervention be required) would be the same as that noted in the letter to Steve Webb in 2002.
Given the above, can I suggest a way forward in resolving this matter. This would avoid any involvement of the commission and any resulting difficulties that could follow for yourself and your business interests.
Comply with all requests in respect of removal of data. In respect of myself this relates to Mark Raymond who lives in Bedfordshire last week but now according to yourself as resident of Dorset.
Also confirm that all emails sent to you in respect of personal information about me have been destroyed.
Publish a statement on your UK 400 rare bird alert blog confirming that all data protection requests have been complied with and all further requests will be honoured.
Publish a revised UK 400 life list with the amendments. Also ensure that this list is available to viewed by all birders in the future and not to uk 400 members only.
I would suggest that such a course of action is perfectly reasonable and would resolve matters.
As has been made clear by others, nobody wants the commission involved - least of all yourself.
Thanks.
Steve, in one breath you were claiming to be top of the pile. In any event, you certainly have the capacity to return to pole position. In my view, there is no point to a comparative list of any kind, if it does not feature the Number One - no point to it, and hence my continual refusal to remove you from it. You either stay on it or the entire list is removed and made redundant - in my view, there is no other option. You are clearly an obsessive lister and Paul Chapman has proven that your figure is correct so why, other than personal distaste for me, do you not wish to be recognised for your achievements. A list for you of some form is already placed in the public domain on Bubo.
Mark Rayment
You are one complete hypocrite. Only yesterday I received an email complaint that you were illegally taking Richard Bonser's facebook account file and reproducing it here without Richard's permission. Exactly, what you are accusing me of doing - placing something in the public domain without the permission of the actual individual concerned.
You are one complete hypocrite. Only yesterday I received an email complaint that you were illegally taking Richard Bonser's facebook account file and reproducing it here without Richard's permission. Exactly, what you are accusing me of doing - placing something in the public domain without the permission of the actual individual concerned.
black kite 1964
Well-known member
Lee. Facebook is a pubic website. I have apologised to Richard in respect of my bad manners and any confusion. If I think I am in the wrong I will apologise - does this principle apply to you Lee - I suspect not?
You do not have my informed consent to hold the information that you hold. Please comply with mine and others requests for the data to be removed.
James Lowther
Well-known member
Steve Webb
Well-known member
Lee,
I have discussed with Paul by phone his posting regarding the UK400 figure you have for me. It is not fully clear that this figure is correct.
For many years you have said I have not seen a Hornemann's Arctic Redpoll. I have told you on a number of occasions that I saw the Fair Isle bird in 1989. However you continued to say in public places (e.g. on facebook on 31/12/10 – only just over 6 months ago) that I had not seen one. Then only this week on birdforum you post the following “I would be the first to recommend a relumping of these taxa Richard because I would be the only top lister to benefit - I'm the only one who hasn't seen a Hornemann's Arctic Redpoll.”
This is just one example where you get your facts wrong on what is on my list and what I count. I cannot keep up with it all. I do not keep a UK400 list nor wish to have one in the future. I do not read what I am allowed to tick or not tick regarding the UK400 because I am not interested in it. If I was interested in a UK400 list you would see it on BUBO because that is where I put my BOURC/IRC list and my Birdwatch list.
Regarding my BOURC/IRC list - as far I am aware it is the highest list. If someone wants to show otherwise then they are welcome to put their list on BUBO so its clear what species are on their list and when they saw them.
I hope this makes it clear that I do not want a UK400 list anywhere.
Steve
Richard Fuller
New member
As Steve intimates, BUBO listing is a public forum for list comparison where everyone retains control of their own list - this seems to be a perfect solution to me. BUBO provides a safe place where anyone who cares about the length of their list (which to be fair is most of us who even occasionally twitch a rarity) can see where they stand in the rankings.
I wish we had this problem here in Australia - there are rather too few birders to worry about serious list comparison - the 800+ 'crowd' are in a highly select group!
cheers,
Rich Fuller (Brisbane)
jalethbridge
I like sea-watching
Phew, 500th post. For a minute I was worried we might not get there.....
- Status
