Ranger-Cpt wrote:
I thought A.F.R.A stood for All Fronts Re-enactment Association, are we now calling Air-soft re-enactment?
You "Re-enact" the fear Rolling Eyes , so If I go up to Lothian Road on a Saturday night and start picking fights will I be re-enacting?
Lets not sell our Granny in order to enlarge what we would. Do Air-softers need PLI Paul and when defending our Hobby will you fight for the issues in re-enactment or will you fight for the Air-softers?
This is just getting silly, power be to these lads for what they want to do but it's blatting, nothing more and nothing less and the fact that they wear WW2 uniforms is irrelevant. If they were dressed up as characters from Star Wars they'd be doing the exact same thing.
We'll be calling on-line gamers reenactors next! Evil or Very MadOff topic here but I'll answer nevertheless - No one is pigeon holing these people - Yes they need PLI. Very much YES.
The Airsoft Component is irelevant - it's the re-enactment component that's the issue.
When we say All Fronts - It depends which front is opened as to which Front we fight on!
Re-enactment incorporating Airsoft is a relevant and as valid as what you or I do. But again entrenched attitudes sitfle development and advancement. If a few years ago we had not embraced some of what we do today there would be no vibrant scene as there is.
If people like myseslf and others had not moved towards regulating public battle displays for instance you and your happy band of rampaging Rangers woudl not have 11 acre fields in which to ply your trade - You'd still be charging up and down railway platforms with your chinstraps undone (not you personally - it's a generalisation)
If these airsoft people hadn't started the trend away from SF and SWAT teams with 20,000 rds per game and moved towards a game with more substance they would not find themselves on a re-enactment forum presenting their case - They woudl not have moved in the direction they are doing.
So for this reason if nothing else I support them publicly - YES - I want them as members - AFRA wants them as members - They will make that decision and no doubt some will see it how they wish. Blatant electioneering? DAMN RIGHT IT IS!!!! AFRA will have them and have them early!!!! Another string to our bow...... And when their support and inclusion benefits you sitting on the sidleines - well - What can I say.
I'd sell my Granny - for the right cause.....
It's blatting - It's blatting is it? we are not allowed to mention Normandy 44 unless it's positive - we've been told that - So I can't ask about large nmbers of men riding Chaffees across open fields in front of MG42s.... or I would. I'd ask what that was? How accurate and historical that was? But I can't so I wont. Because it sparks a storm of protest and indignation.
I'd ask what emotions and what thoughts go through the minds of ALL participants on the Victory Show field when they are BLATTING.........
Sheesh! Talk about glass houses. we are not allowed to show the truth on here - we must daintily step around issues and pretend that no one has any foibles.......
Yes! N44 did a Landings display and people sniped at them and had to stoop so low as to question the amount of sand used on the bloody beach!!!!!
Just like people are hitting on these guys who are rapidly ascending a ladder - and catching up the people at the top. Because when you are at the top of a ladder there is no direction to go - Except the one that comes when the upstart knocks you off it....... Shocked
What a funny old game we indulge in.
As for online - there are a plenty on here who seem to be classed as re-enactors who dont' have kit, dont' get seen at shows and indeed never turn up enywhere except here....... No one knocks them - Do they? No - many try hard to recruit them. Wonder why no one is working hard to recruit these silly airsoft gamers? Mind I can see where they WON'T be applying should they want to get further involved. Well done all those friendly, gregarious types.... Rolling Eyes
Above main quote by Paul Dolby from 'Photos' thread on WWII forum (my bold).
I would like to resurrect this for discussion as goalposts have been moving between now and then.
Dolby has left us alone for while now, which is good, but he hasn't forgotten us.
IF we (CiA) were to gain affiliation to AFRA and then offer reenactor status to qualifying members:
a) that would be another way of making sure CiA remains the focus of WW2 airsoft (addressing Guy's concerns)
b) offer a service to 'our' members, some of which struggle with the UKARA rules (as I do)
c) offer small amount of personal insurance to members
d) give PLI status to CiA
e) please the reenactor wannabes who don't want to abide by usual reenactor group rules
f) allow RIF purchases from retailers (we would need AFRA support in this, rolling out an ActionHobbies type acceptance - shouldn't be too hard with UKARA non-core members who are ticked off at the moment and hopefully add some core members too)
g) give chaps who import necessary documentation for status
Yep, definitely worthy of discussion.
Personally, I'll be joining AFRA soon and will recommend that all the guys in Kampfgruppe SS do as well, as soon as we get our unit site online I'll be asking for a link. First off PLI can't be a bad thing and secondly as its a means of importing Airsoft RIF's without the hassle of joining a fixed airsoft site. Plus there's already a fair percentage of traditional reenactors taking up airsoft anyway, we've got four in our group already and that number can only grow larger.
Stubblehopper on the WWII reenactor's forum.
We do need to think about how Chris seems to be stealing some of our thunder.....
I've written to Paul to open the discussion again and try and get some firm proposals before now and Sunday.
We can move swiftly on this if groundwork is sorted - we already know through Guy's convo's that this is do'able, we just need to have the right reasons to do it.
Just checked all of AFRA's documentation and there is nothing that precludes us from affiliation to AFRA, their constitution is quite inclusive.
CiA could be affiliated to AFRA in which case all members would be deemed to be members of AFRA. So we would need a constitution and then a formal membership scheme - AFAR fees are paid direct to them.
Big question is who we deem to be 'members'. Definitely not just forum members - a criteria for CiA games attendance would not only give an incentive for chaps to come and play but it would also preclude 'collector' & 'photo freaks' who don't play.
Agreed.
Membership perhaps two CiA games back-dated to BotB if that's legal?!
Ta
S
That's the question - if we can come under the AFRA banner what would our status and defence be? I don't think the reenactors have a defence along the lines of playing at events, more membership of acknowledged organisations. Actually as the VCRA says for us, membership of a site (being 'proper').
Stipulations of game attendance would be our rule much as UKARA's 3/2 game rule (yeh, I know it's in the Act notes Jay!)
As you are all aware I suggested this a two weeks ago, when I asked if we wanted to try to push UKARA to officially acknowledge the reenactors defence for the sale of airsoft weapons ....knowing that the AFRA route was open from our investigations in October ..
'We' didn't approach Frenchie - you did without involving your three partners. With no plan or objective that stood up to scrutiny and had been already extensively explored last year.
I'm not quite sure how this U-Turn has come about now 
, although I'm prepared to continue to explore it , as I think it's worthwhile for a lot of good for CiA reasons . 
My Suggestions -
Lets decide what we want to do before we approach AFRA , which I would rather do face to face than as a series of PMs , we know Dalby is desperate for bums on seats .
If we do offer CiA affiliated membership of AFRA (which from memory will cost about £30 year) then lets have a thought about what we will get out of it as well as what the players percieve,& I'm not thinking cash .
We're still also left with convincing the shops to accept it as vaild for airsoft , another task in itself .
* sighs *
Take a moment to read forums posts Guy!
I've had my whinge .... I'll shut up and be productive now 
Can't find Dalby's numbers , thought I had em on a pm somewhere but checked and can't find em ...have also checked through paperwork , they'll turn up soon hopefully 
I think Helga is a member of AFRA might be worth speaking to her about it , ie Pauls involvement ,costs etc .
Tommorrow I'll have a look through the booking lists and see how many people would qualify for the defence if they had only played at our games / co hosted games. Might be usefull to see how many could take advantage off it immediatley .
PS This gives me concerns , not big ones but definately irritation .
Personally, I'll be joining AFRA soon and will recommend that all the guys in Kampfgruppe SS do as well, as soon as we get our unit site online I'll be asking for a link. First off PLI can't be a bad thing and secondly as its a means of importing Airsoft RIF's without the hassle of joining a fixed airsoft site. Plus there's already a fair percentage of traditional reenactors taking up airsoft anyway, we've got four in our group already and that number can only grow larger.
It would be very good to get in there as soon as possible if we are looking to do it.
What I'd want to make sure is that AFRA aren't just another UKARA style group that will stall or stumble under the weight of its own committee.
Some points:
To be loyal to the Queen her heirs and successors.
What the!?! Can't quite follow that one. What next, to bow down before God and Jesus!? 
The Association in General Meeting may also require Members to contribute to the funds of the Association by way of a special levy.
Interesting to find out what is meant by special levy and what restrictions should be applied to that.
It's committee structure is quite interesting - it's clearly led by the chief architects (nothing wrong with that necessarily) but also input from sub-groups putting forward their spokesman.
While I wouldn't be 'bounced' into action because of Stubble's comments it's clearly and indication of where 'leakage' could occur. I'd rather be leading than jogging alongside, as per Guy's comments previously.
Dolby is giving me a ring so I'll try and cover all bases so we can come to a collective decision on or before our meeting on Sunday. It's clearly got to be of positive benefit to CiA to make it worth considering. I don't think AFRA and UKARA can be compared as one is for the benefit of participants, the other of retailers. But the current UKARA weakness is one of the reasons why this may be a smart move. The non-core UKARA members are clearly unhappy about the 'goings-on' (whether real or not) and many are suffering from poor sales. IF we can join and build on the Dolby/AFRA/ActionHobbies arrangement then that would be a big plus for us and be a help to smaller retailers too.
Just got off the phone with Paul (blummin 'ek he blabs!).
1. AFRA would be delighted to accept us into the re-enacting fold.
2. CiA would be affiliated to AFRA
3. CiA would administer CiA members
4. Criteria for members is up to CiA
5. Paid up members would get:
a) Reenactor status and reenactor card
b) Personal insurance for theft or accidental breakage up to £5,000
c) Personal PLI of £5mil
d) Personal insurance for injury in game/at show of £43,000
e) Documentation for legitimate importation
6. AFRA card accepted at ActionHobies, Airsoft Warehouse amongst others, list increasing (and probably faster with our help and knobling non-core UKARA members)
7. Benefits to CiA
a) Another reason to be 'loyal' to CiA
b) We can add to £15 AFRA fee for working funds
c) We can stipulate CiA game booking as criteria for joining scheme - an incentive to actually play
d) We can use private land for games by stating 'members only' and know we are insured
e) Risk assessment handled centrally (forms filed in, lists compiled)
f) We can enter shows (static or working displays, recruitment drives etc)
g) Documentation for legitimate importation
h) Putting CiA at the centre of WW2 airsoft
i) A voice in the reenacting community and a central role in getting airsoft known and understood (large market if you want to think in those terms otherwise od PR value)
Erm, that will do for now...
Heh, Dolby slipped up at the start of the conversation - '.. so let's say you set up the group with the name Kampfgruppe SS then your members will...'
I think Chris has been it touch with him already... 
Some pretty good advantages there .... I knew it was a good idea when I thought of it
Nah pisstaking aside, I reckon it's a bit of a no brainer this one . The insurance coverage would be worth it alone , esp if we could us any private land for private battles..
and yes , lets do it before Stubblenobber pleeeze
And yes, Paul had me on the phone for two hours once.....he talks the talk alright !
Q1- cost to members / cost to us?
Q2- we set the criteria for CiA memebership not Afra / VCR ?
Q3 - we would have to maintain a database ? Just thinking DPAct...
Just to be clear on the private game thing.
AFRA doesn't provide 'group' insurance (although he says he's looking into it).
Therefore, as long as a game is organised with only card carrying players then yes, all players are individually covered for most eventualities.
However, that doesn't stop them (their legal representative) from pursuing a claim of negligence (say) on the organisers - CiA in this case.
In other words, insurance is piece of mind and guards against the threat of action that might be taken - insurance companies spread the cost of claims by seeking out as many parties as they can!
So, a small group of members on a photoshoot or training day or camping weekend shout be fine - a proper game really needs group PLI.
This all looks good.
I'm very keen for CiA to get in there as the umbrella organisation covering all these individual groups and before SH sorts this out.
Would it be worth Rich and Gadge being informed about this just incase Dolby is soliciting them too? There's no need for each group to be individually represented as that will cause division and separation.
Thanks
S
This all looks good.
I'm very keen for CiA to get in there as the umbrella organisation covering all these individual groups and before SH sorts this out.
Would it be worth Rich and Gadge being informed about this just incase Dolby is soliciting them too? There's no need for each group to be individually represented as that will cause division and separation.
Thanks
S
I'd leave them out for now, Rich will already have reenactor cover anyway , and I can't see Gadge being bothered to actually do it .
I'm sure Dolby isn't soliciting directly. Rich doesn't need it personally as he is covered by his Chindit thing - Gadge does need it for his 'promenading' at public events, quite apart from airsoft PBI malarkey.
Agree - umbrella is good, fragmented bad.
So, question is, do we put a premium on the price or go for cost?
Scenario:
CiA membership costs £20. Require attendance at one game (retrospective OK). Includes AFRA membership.
Stubble goes direct and pays £15 - gets AFRA under K-SS banner. Stubble's group wins by £5.
CiA runa a CIA member's private day - is Stubble excluded (he isn't a CiA member although he carries the same insurance). Tricky.
If we do charge a premium then the 'trick' would be to offer added value - i.e. a benefit that doesn't cost £5 but is of £5 value to the member.
I need to have a think about the pros and cons of £15 + £x - not to do so seems a wasted opportunity and it's impossible to do add at a later date.
All other groups and clubs charge for a kitty, nothing costs nothing - I'm loath to subsidise players and members any more than we are doing at the moment.
Hmmm, tricky.
If we charge a premium it only takes one to say "I can get it for a fiver less"
If we are upfront about it and we can justify it with maybe "help with forum costs?" then maybe its seen as vote of loyalty . I'd beware of doing it without mentioning the premium for fear of compromising our charity status .
BTW can't do the anaylsis , the booking lists have disappeared in detail from the archived threads - lost in swap to V3 ? We'd need to get them back if we go ahead.
