Sometimes when you have been around as long as I have, you belive what you say is true, but these comments are not the actual fact.

On occasion I am wrong, some of my comments earlier about Frank and the Knifmakers Guild were wrong.

I apologized to Frank at the show and I am doing so again in the forum in which I made the incorrect statements.

1) "There was a time when Fred Carter was President, it was very difficult to become a member. There was one year where the only member to gain voting membership was Steve Rapp."

This is the first statement that was wrong. There were two members who gained their voting memebership that year.

2) "When Frank Centofante became the President, he had a different idea of what the Guild should be and opened the flood gates. Apparently, the voting members liked what Frank was doing as I belive he was re-elected to 4 terms (8 years total)."

This is the second statement that was wrong. Frank as the President does not have the power to determine who or how many members are brought into the Guild.

Also, Frank showed me the names of the members who gained acceptance into the Guild during his terms in office as the President and during previous administrations. The numbers were fairly consistent, to include when Fred was President, except for that one year. So as it turns out, Frank did not "Open the Flood Gates".

3) "To become a voting member, the maker needs to gain signatures from three voting member on their application."

Makers must get 4 signatures on their application.

4) "NOTE: We who are judging these members for voting status are NOT allowed to make any comments as to the quality of their work to the maker. I have no idea why?"

Last year was the first time I was on the Technical Committee. This year I was asked again and received paper work that was to be filled out on each member I looked at. It would appear for whatever reason last year I did not get this paperwork. Probably didnt know I was supposed to.

Regardless, the Guild does ask us to write comments as to the overall craftsmanship of the knives. I found out they keep this paperwork on file for several years. If a pattern occurs, then the maker will be encouraged to pay more attention to that area. This is constructive criticism meant to help the maker.

5) "Also, understand that the Guild has no legal power over any of it's members. The most they can do is kick the maker out of the Guild."

Each written complaint to the Guild about one of their members is forwarded to the Guild Lawyer who reviews it and then makes a recommendation.

Additionally, I found out that the Guild can sanction a member. This can be in the form of loss of voting memebership as well as being fined! So it appears they can do more than just kick them out.

6) "I was an Associate Member years ago. According to the by-laws each member is supposed to have a catalog or something similar. I wrote several members of the board, all voting members and never received a catalog (this is back in the old days, before the Internet).

My personal belief is that if the Officers of the Guild will not follow their own Guild lines, then how can they enforce the regulations on it's voting members."

I gave Frank further clarification as to this point. In fact it is a rule that a voting member must have some kind of catalog.

I would like to thank Frank Centofante, Mel Pardue and Warren Osborne for taking the time to talk with me and give me the facts.

All three of these Gentlemen asked me to call them if I ever had any questions about anything that has ever happened in the Guild as everything is archived.

If necessary I plan to take them up on their offer.

Probably the most important thing I got out of our conversation is that, there are people who care about the Guild, what it stands for and where it is headed.

Talking with these three Gentlemen and seeing their conviction for the Guild and the willingness to help showed me that the Board of Directors really does care.

For me, that was the best thing I brought home from the show.

Les, I would be interested in your personal feelings about Guild membership. Would you recommend it? Is it helpful to the members (other than having the Guild logo on their business cards)? Is it for everyone (all makers)? Are the controversial/political issues moving into the background in favor of more substantive considerations?

I got an application several years ago, and sat on it because I couldn't come up with the application fee at that time. Subsequently, there has been enough wrangling, rumor, and general bad-mouthing that I threw it in the trash, and have done quite well without being associated with the Guild.

I am willing to reconsider my position, however, if there are some positive benefits to membership. Thanks for your comments.

Also I know the ABS has associate membership, and honorary memberships, does the guild, and what positive benefit could I as a dealer see by becoming a member if possible?

Being in attendance for the first time ever, I have no previous experience with this meeting and what to expect. The only observation I made that seemed to stick with me was that "I felt worse when I walked out of the meeting than when I entered."

In my humble and inexperienced opinion, this type of meeting was not conducive to overall "high-performance". If the CKD were ever to have a meeting such as the one I witnessed, I would shut it down the following day.

That being said, it was apparent that the fault was not personally that of the directors of the Guild, themselves being a temporary leadership body. However, in the real world, the buck has to stop somewhere. In this case, the blame must fall on those who are squarely in charge.

That's my take on the meeting event!

Alex

Alex,

Your right, your organization would never have a meeting like that.

The Guild, unlike CKD is a Non-Profit orgainzation.

Also, you don't have 500+ members who you offer no salary or benefits to. Additionally, these "artists" are independent agents whose lively hoods depend on what they can make and sell. In most cases they work in isolation and are not afforded the support level that you offer your employees.

Consequently, to get more than a few to agree on anything is a major accomplishment.

Ive been to about 10 business meetings, I thought this was one of the better ones.

I do agree with several of the members who asked the membership to try and work together. Instead of letting the agenda's of a few break the Guild apart.

The question, we who are involved in custom knives is what can we do to make it better.

We need open and meaningful discussions, workable ideas and solutions that will benefit the overall experience of making and collecting custom knives.

In an orgainzation as big as the Guild there is no solution that will please everyone. This needs to be removed as a goal.

At the show this year I realized two things. First, my involvement in custom knives was not as fun for me as it used to be.

Second, I was going to do whatever I could to make my involvment in custom knives more fun.

To Don Cowels,
Don,If you want to get into the Guild because it can do something for you financially, you probably won't achieve it. The Guild is not organized to reap rewards onto it members, but instead to allow the member to grow and become a part of the most prestigious group of knife makers on the planet. As Les has stated, it is impossible to get 500 creative independent individuals to agree on every thing. We will always have differences of opinions and bickering, some because of facts, some because of envy, and some because of false gossip.
I have been a member since 1976 and have never regretted joining for one moment. I doubt that the Guild has added to my income over the years, but the association with this group of people has made me a much better person, and for that I am eternally grateful. I would certainly recommend some one with your talent and integrity to join, and would be glad to sign your application if you decide to apply.

I actually attended the meeting to consider an application as an Associate member. I always want to help and belong to wherever high-performance is being sought in this industry. I left the meeting a little less than feeling cheerful, so I have to consider it against the value of my time. I have enough negativity and non-belief around me as it is, and I frankly don't view the future of this industry in many of the ways it was presented. I will iterate that those opinions were case forth by general members only, and not the board themselves.

In my personal case, I don't have enough time presently to join every group, but I would like to support the one that I considered the very best in the industry. I'm not opposed to the use of new technology, given the right format of it's usage. However, I don't see the world as a stagnant place where tradition should dictate the future. I'm unwilling to stay where I am in life, and my personal ventures in this business would likely run into direct conflict with the views that I heard eventually.

As it stands, I'm undecided as to whether I shouldn't just continue to operate on the perimeter of any closed society. Given the fact that I'm one of those in the active pursuit of global industry change, any operation that is concentrated on the limitations of change acceptance and lethargic attitudes would most likely consider my company as a sore thumb. I tend to be very forgiving with people when it comes to personal issues, but if it came to my company, and those that it defends, that would be another case entirely. I would have to consider this carefully, before I made the commitment to offer support.

Alex

Rade, thanks for your comments. Food for thought.