Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

NAUGHTY NAUGHTY ! JR --- but normal --

jtaylor wrote:CHA news article now published here regarding the name change:-

http://www.chassociation.org/news/newsa ... NewsId=656

The CH grapevine (and the CH Forum!) works faster than the communications mechanisms sometimes!

Cheers,

Julian

CHOBA news article, surely.....

Talking of communications.......

The article states that "The Board seeks to bring this Association to the notice of as many Old Blues as possible....".

Since the change came into effect on October 1st., perhaps it might have been wise to circulate an e-mail in order to inform "as many Old Blues as possible".

However, this would have then alienated Old Blues who prefer not to use electronic communications.

Oh dear....

Since I was not consulted, either by Email, Post, or Telephone ---- I assume that I did not qualify for "As many Old Blues as Possible"

And I am therefore Impossible --- but you know that !

Seriously, I was a bit "Miffed" to find out about it, on this Forum, ------ I have been an Old Blue now, for many many years, and one gets the impression that they think we are DEAD !

NEILL THE NOTORIOUS wrote:Seriously, I was a bit "Miffed" to find out about it, on this Forum, ------

Have to agree with you there.

Apparently, there is absolutely NO truth in the rumour that C.H.O.B.A...............

now stands for.............

Christs Hospital Old Buffers Association !

I get monthly emails from the CHA and there was nothing on there.

englishangel wrote:I get monthly emails from the CHA and there was nothing on there.

Beacause it was only confirmed at the last Board meeting in the middle of October and the next e-mail Newsletter is at the beginning of November.

Things move slower than we'd like sometimes, and we're keen to get information out as soon as we can - and whilst we meet quite regularly via teleconference, we were keen to agree our communications at the last face-to-face meeting, which was only two weeks ago. We'd agreed a rollout, website change and communications for start of November, to coincide with the newsletter - but have had to move quicker in response to the good old CH rumour mill! (hence the website logos etc. aren't in place yet, and I'll be working on that over the weekend if I get time...Lou Barr of Frogbox Design (Old Blue) has done us proud again, for free - thanks Lou!)

One of the reasons for the change is that the majority of people who aren't already close to CH just don't know what "The CH Association" is - in spite of Grecian's presentations, publicity on Old Blues Day etc.
If they see "The CH Association" on its own, it's not necessarily clear which of the many CH organisations it is (it's very confusing if you're not "in the know"! - whereas The CH Old Blues Association clearer.

It's a minor change, trying to just make it all a bit more obvious - nothing more than that! The costs of change are negligible, especially given that online communications changes are free (thanks to the fact we don't pay a web designer for the CHA website) so there's almost no cost involved.

Hopefully that explains a bit. We don't get it right all the time, and we're all volunteers putting in lots of time and effort.
Sorry if we (the board) don't get it right all the time, but we ARE trying to get things right you know!

JT

Richard Ruck wrote:Talking of communications.......

However, this would have then alienated Old Blues who prefer not to use electronic communications.

Oh dear....

Come off it, Richard.IFI consciously ask not to receive electronic comunications then I know I will miss out on some things - I'm not that stupid and I doubt there is an OB more backward than me.

You can't be that backward, you are on here.

englishangel wrote:You can't be that backward, you are on here.

Exactly the point.

The subject of communications was raised at a meeting of Governors a couple of years ago, which I attended in my (then) capacity as a CHA Board member. A significant minority of the more senior governors were quite vehement in their opposition to electronic communications. I can only imagine that their views reflect those of a section of the wider Old Blue community. I could be wrong, of course, but I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption.

The real point that I was trying to make is that it is difficult, if not impossible, for the Board to keep everyone happy.

Thanks RIchard - I agree with your observation! All we can do is our best, and we know from experience that this won't please all the people all the time!

There has been an opinion that everything should be announced first in "The Old Blue" - if this were the case, the CH grapevine would beat us to every piece of communication, as it'd be out there and being discussed (without all the facts, background, reasoning etc.)

There is another view that the proactive electronic comms should be first - i.e. the email newsletter. BUT, this isn't subscribed to by everyone, so isn't readily accessible by all, and only comes out once a month (more often, and less people would subscribe I'd expect).
My (personal) view is in this day and age the CHA website should be the primary up-to-date form of communication - I and the CHOBA Office can get approved messages on there in minutes, accessible to everyone etc. If the more IT-savvy users subscribe to the RSS feed for the News, then they'll know about changes/news immediately.
This should then be followed-up with the monthly email newsletter, aggregating the month's news, and sharing proactively with the CHOBA membership.
The Old Blue should then capture the relevent news from the previous 6 months and ensure the non-IT-centric Old Blues are aware.

That's my personal view - we don't have anything quite that formal as a formal procedure, and I'd be interested in others' views of how we can do it better??

I know personally of one non Old Blue, member of Singing Old Blues, parent of at least one Old Blue, widow of another, and now Donation Governor who, when heard of the rumour of the change of name, said something like 'well, that's me out of that Association, then'
Is that what was intended by adding 'Old Blues' to the title of the renamed Association?
I'd be glad of the views of current CHA (sorry, CHOBA) Board members? I assume that the views of the widest constituencies were consulted before Council agreed the change in name and that this included the views of non-Old Blue members of the former CH Club and of the CHA, such as the person I mention above?

So why happy to be part of Singing Old Blues, but not the Old Blues' Association??

J