And what do you plan to do to remedy that?
With respect (yes, I do have a lot of respect for much of what you post), whilst it is fine to trot out the "what are you doing/going to do" line, isn't supplying useful information and ideas doing something constructive in its own right? Not everyone that has ideas can go beyond the provision of those ideas for an almost infinite variety of reasons. I don't think this should be continually questioned. Those that are in a position to act on them should be thankful for ideas that others provide.
If it was the case that they were, I'd be fine with that.
It's the Henny Penny thing that pervades every incorporated voluntary association - not just railway preservation. The Bogong
s and bayside1
's of the world are happy to eat the proverbial bread, but not sow or reap the wheat, or grind the flour. Is it laziness, or is it a lack of intellect - or both?I have watched four Presidents and several Council members actually end up with significant health problems simply due to the fact that they were trying to do too much to save and try and keep going a place and a society whose aims they cared about as too many people sat on their asres and did sweet bugger-all except make suggestions as how they thought Things Should Be Done from armchairs.
But quite frankly, saying in essence that the current structure is bad/outdated, and should be changed but not actually doing anything other than that is much worse.
From someone who has been there, what the ARHS desperately need is help. What they do - preserve all the other stuff about railways that isn't an R class or diesel or carriages - is incredibly important for not just Victoria's railway history, but all of Victoria's history.
Problem is that none of it - as brutal as this sounds - allows people to pretend to be railwaymen, or allow railwaymen to pretend to be old-timey railwaymen. There's little of the playing trains aspect of the ARHS's core activities to attract a large number of people.
Enough has been tried. Lobbying - professionally and privately - was tried, but failed.
Something else to remember: VicTrack evince little interest in the collection they own (and let's not forget for one second that a large percentage of the museum exhibits are in fact owned by the State Government - with only F176, the ASG which is going to Bellarine, the Hitachi 187M, a few carriages and D2 604 in the Museum owned by ARHS, along with VR tram 53 in Preston Workshops and 200MT at South Gippsland as I recall outside the Museum being ARHS owned) and aside from occasionally forgetting and assuming SRHC own things - which they don't - there's little input or from what I saw care and certainly no funding for half a century.
I'll also call bulls**t on this claim by bayside1
: "no real vision, museum or business related skills or understanding of what a modern museum should be."
What a load of codswallop. I've known many members of Council, and I know for a fact that many did have museum skills, and some had forgotten more business skills than the likes of bayside1 and Bogong will ever know. Many others had specialist curating skills. But never let that get in the way of amateur armchair criticism.