Why did they deny you membership??
Back in 2002, when I first became involved with ME message boards and forums, the UK online community was much smaller, closer knit and had considerably fewer platforms than are available to us now. In 2002, three charity orgs, AfME, AYME and the MEA launched a forum called "MEssageUK".
This was the era of Chris Clark (AfME) and Val Hockey (MEA). AfME and AYME pulled out of the forum not long after launching, probably because of the criticism there were receiving. That left only the MEA. Charles Shepherd was still the MEA's paid Medical Adviser and was a poster on the forum. Tony Britton was the main moderator, assisted by the late Christine Llewellyn. So I was known to the MEA.
The were many concerns about how AfME and the MEA were being managed at that time and the MEA got fed up with critical posts and ME politics and introduced a "no ME politics" rule. I set up a Yahoo group as an alternative platform where constructive criticism was welcomed.
It became evident that the moderators of the MEA's forum were stripping out old, critical posts. In late 2003, just a day or two before the December trustee elections in which Charles Shepherd was standing (having been sacked by the MEA that May for whistleblowing), the MEA's forum was suddenly and inexplicably closed down and there was no opportunity to archive our posts.
In December 2003, Dr Shepherd was elected to the MEA's board of trustees along with Christine Llewellyn, who was a member of my own forum. The early days of this small, mostly new MEA board, following Val Hockey's redundancy, were mired by a lack of transparency. I and a handful of associates asked awkward questions; raised our concerns on the Co-Cure Listserv and other platforms, and generally pushed for greater transparency and accountability.
In 2004, the person who owned the now defunct ONE CLICK Campaign website requested a copy of the Member's Register, which at that point there was a legal right for anyone to request. The MEA put a notice in their magazine warning members that they might be contacted directly. However, the Register was not provided. (The MEA was concerned that members might be approached to support the calling of an EGM.)
In June 2004, I mentioned on my own forum that I had applied for membership of the MEA. I had not previously been a member.
Applications for membership were usually processed by the admin staff at the MEA's head office. Evidently Christine Llewellyn intercepted my application, held it back and discussed it with the other board members. My application form and cheque were returned a few days later with a covering letter saying that the board had decided to deny me membership. A second application was tabled for discussion at the December 2004 meeting of the board and was minuted as having been rejected again.
I lodged a complaint which was never resolved. They would give no reason for not admitting me to membership and at one point they sat on a cheque for weeks before finally returning it. I asked for copies of all communications and documents which had informed their decision but they refused to provide anything. So there was no official reason ever given for denying me membership of the Association and my complaints reached an impasse.
Unofficially, Christine Llewellyn told a former associate of mine that she was concerned that if I was admitted to the membership I might assist with the calling of EGMs or stand for election to the board (which I had no intention of doing) and that I would be a disruptive influence if I were to become a member. Evidently, a sufficient number of the other trustees were persuaded that I was a potential danger to the stability of the organization. Also Christine and some of the other trustees did not like the company I kept. One trustee told me that she had voted against my being barred from membership but that all applications were approved by the board. This was not the case*.
In
2005 a number of resolutions were passed via EGM and postal ballot giving the board tighter control over who could stand for election, including that only members of the Association could stand. Prior to the change, non members could be nominated for trustee elections on the understanding that they would become members after successful election to the board.
They also added this clause to the 2005 version of the Articles:
28.2 (b) The Board of Trustees will have the right to take up references and undertake interviews of nominees to the Board of Trustees and to make recommendations and provide information to the members of the Charity concerning any nominee
*This clause was added to the 2014 version of the Articles:
29. No person shall become a member of the company unless they are 18 years of age and:
(a) that person has completed an application for membership in a form approved by the directors, and
(b) the directors have approved the application.
Are we expected to believe that all applications for membership are put before the board for approval and if so, on what do they base their decisions?
