Talk:Melbourne Club

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag Melbourne Club is part of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne.

[edit] Exclusion

I think it should as mention that it is known that people of Jewish decent are not allowed in the club, although the Melbourne Club deny's this, there have been many reports of people not being accepted because of there Jewish nature and so on and so forth

As an actual member of this establishment, I can confirm that the club does have a number of Jewish members, more than the two Gentlemen mentioned. Readers should understand that membership is not simply for celebrities or the very rich. Wealth and position are not the criterion. The simple criterion is that each new member must be acceptable to every other member.

The club is a home away from home where anyone can and does talk to everyone else about all sorts of subjects as complete equals. Wealth and position mean nothing in the club. That's what it's about.

What has happened in the past, despite our efforts to avoid embarasing anyone, is that one or two high profile candidates who believed they were entitled for one reason or another to become members,were silly enough to make their candidacy known to the press in the first place and have then used religion or racial background as an excuse to salve their injured dignity when declined.

As a general rule, a member would have to feel very strongly that a candidate was going to compromise this unique atmosphere to take any action. That action in the first part would be to raise the matter with the candidate's proposer, seconder and referees or "supporters".

The matter would be resolved by either the quiet withdrawl of the nomination or by assuaging the concerns of the member who raised the matter. All of this happens confidentially so as not to embarrass anyone.

In the matter of the last three "public" failed candidates, I can assure readers that it had nothing to do with their religion. They were also warned that persisting with their candidacy to the point where a vote would be taken, in the face of a lukewarm, if not hostile reception from the membership, might result in public embarrassment