Re: Fun and games
- From: Pete Knight <pete084@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 12:37:35 -0700
On Jul 22, 8:30 pm, marc <initial.surn...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Pete Knight wrote:
On Jul 22, 7:47 pm, marc <initial.surn...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<snip>
Are they? Says who? How many campaigning organisations do you know that
organise "fun nights" and "theme nights" for any other reason that to
further their aim?
<snip>
Errrm, excuse me, but Duncan's argument is that BN isn't a campaigning
organisation, and yes campaigning organisations DO have fun nights, I
would refer you to the Royal British legion which was set up to aid ex
servicemen, it campaigns for servicemen's rights and raised funds
quite efficiently, and has an extensive club network where people have
been known to have fun!!
The fun is there to raise funds, the fun is a function of the operating
of the organisation, fun is not an end in itself. There has been no
proof that this years bunfights have raised any money, and no matter how
much AW wants to crow about the spinoffs there was no mention of those
being the reason before hand, the only reason quoted was fun.
Which is what I've been saying all along, if properly managed the 'fun
and games' should be self financing and with any luck there might be
something over to put behind the clock on the mantelpiece.
Pete Knight
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fun and games
- From: marc
- Re: Fun and games
- References:
- Fun and games
- From: Duncan Heenan
- Re: Fun and games
- From: Reg Barlow
- Re: Fun and games
- From: Pete Knight
- Re: Fun and games
- From: Hagar
- Re: Fun and games
- From: marc
- Re: Fun and games
- From: Pete Knight
- Re: Fun and games
- From: marc
- Fun and games
- Prev by Date: Re: Fun and games
- Next by Date: Re: Fun and games
- Previous by thread: Re: Fun and games
- Next by thread: Re: Fun and games
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
