transparancy/member information

I think that posting anonymously on that topic falls only a tad shy of
fulfilling the definition of "irony."

LOL@Bob - That's what many of us have been saying to him right along.
It's not that some of what he says doesn't have merit - it's that his
unwillingness to either identify himself and/or actually get involved
in fixing things (other than writing complaining posts) is a major
detraction from any valid points that he might make.

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
I think that posting anonymously on that topic falls only a tad shy of
fulfilling the definition of "irony."

Jay wrote:
LOL@Bob - That's what many of us have been saying to him right along.
It's not that some of what he says doesn't have merit - it's that his
unwillingness to either identify himself and/or actually get involved
in fixing things (other than writing complaining posts) is a major
detraction from any valid points that he might make.

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
I think that posting anonymously on that topic falls only a tad shy of
fulfilling the definition of "irony."


Who cares who this person is .. His posts are more thought thru and
constructive than all the angry drible that many posters have expressed
because he wont divulge his idenity.

Gotta go now must go see if my bookeeper's done with the 3rd quarter
tax reports and sign them.

OK lets deal with this issue of my name..
1. I am not a member of the board or of any other association or club or part of any commercial interest related in any way to soaring. i am a simple member for past 15 years period end of conversation.
Plain english. I am not speaking with any hidden agenda. If you don't believe that tough **** and put me on ignore.

2. I choose not to post my name for a wide variety of reasons that make a whole lot of sense to me and have absolutly nothing to do with soaring. Not the least of which is that I have terminal cancer and am about to begin some very heavy surgeries (not for the first time), which probably will not be too successful.. OK get it.. i choose not to put my name out there because i do not want my wife to have to deal with wingnuts who took my name off the internet during this time.. That is only reason #1.. there are several others that are frankly none of your stinking business and which have absolutly no connection to soaring and which do not impact the validity of my comments on this board.
SO dig it or put me on ignore.

3. Ideas, opinions and suggestions should be dealt with by a reader based upon their merits and not upon the signiture. That is one of my problems with some organizations (the ssa included, but not exclusively) All too often "BIG NAMES" use their celebrity to branch out . Do you really want Barbara Striesand m making foreign policy? is she really qualified? There are a heck of a l;ot of people who will listen to her or read her ramblings just because she signs them. But in fact isn't it the idea that is important?

My ideas, comments and analysis is offered in a pure form. There are no hidden agendas.
So far the jerks on this board who are circling the wagons around the establishment that took us down this path have sought to divert a reasonable discussion of my ideas and opinions by making a lack of a signiture the issue, NOT THE IDEAS.. I feel sad for the SSA and for those who fall for this well proven tried and true tactic . It is employeed by many people including athletes who get busted for steriods or such and then try to divert the conversation to the system or some other nonesense. Politicians are masters of this game. IT IS A GAME PLAYED TO DIVERT A DISCUSSION AWAY FROM THE ISSUES.
THAT IS WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.. plain and simple.. you are seeking to make my lack of a signiture the issue, not the points that i raise. Over the past weeks there have only been one or two responses that presented rational differing points of view. That is a shame. I have certainly raised many issues that need to be discussed.

So once again I have raised the issue of the board hiding stuff from members.. And now There are those who choose NOT to directly discuss or to comment on THE ISSUE.. but who are trying to say that since i am not putting my name on the idea the idea is not valid. That is a logic that simply does not stand up and is total bull****.

So for you two who are circling the wagons... just how do you feel about the issue??? how do you feel that the board is not being forthcoming and that transparancy is not happening???

you now know that i am in no way connected commercially or organizationally in any way with soaring. I am a simple pilot who flies often. thats it.

I also have the experience and ability to understand this mess. while we are at it.. NO I WILL NOT BE PHYSICALLY ABLE TO RUN FOR DIRECTOR OR TO ASSUME ANY ACTIVE ROLE.. I AM DYING

SCREW YOU GUYS!!!

5bg




"Jay" wrote in message ups.com...
LOL@Bob - That's what many of us have been saying to him right along.
It's not that some of what he says doesn't have merit - it's that his
unwillingness to either identify himself and/or actually get involved
in fixing things (other than writing complaining posts) is a major
detraction from any valid points that he might make.

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
I think that posting anonymously on that topic falls only a tad shy of
fulfilling the definition of "irony."

I like this guy!

-EX

On Oct 18, 6:16*pm, "5-BG" 5-bghatesspam @ fake.com wrote:
OK lets deal with this issue of my name..
1. I am not a member of the board or of any other association or club or part of any commercial interest related in any way to soaring. i am a simple member for past 15 years period end of conversation.
*Plain english. I am not speaking with any hidden agenda. If you don't believe that tough **** and put me on ignore.

2. I choose not to post my name for a wide variety of reasons that make a whole lot of sense to me and have absolutly nothing to do with soaring. Not the least of which is that I have terminal cancer *and am about to begin some very heavy surgeries (not for the first time), which probably will not be too successful.. OK get it.. i choose not to put my name out there because i do not want my wife to have to deal with wingnuts who took my name off the internet *during this time.. That is only reason #1.. there are several others that are frankly none of your stinking business and which have absolutly no connection to soaring and which do not impact the validity of my comments on this board.
* SO dig it or put me on ignore.

* 3. Ideas, opinions and suggestions should be dealt with by a reader based upon their merits and not upon the signiture. That is one of my problems with some organizations (the ssa included, but not exclusively) All too often "BIG NAMES" use their celebrity to branch out . *Do you really want Barbara Striesand m making foreign policy? is she really qualified? There are a heck of a l;ot of people who will listen to her or read her ramblings just because she signs them. But in fact isn't it the idea that is important?

* My ideas, comments and analysis is offered in a pure form. There are no hidden agendas.
*So far the jerks on this board who are circling the wagons around the establishment that took us down this path have sought to divert *a reasonable discussion of my ideas and opinions *by making a lack of a signiture the issue, NOT THE IDEAS.. I feel sad for the SSA and for those who fall for this *well proven tried and true tactic . It is employeed by many people including athletes who get busted for steriods or such and then try to divert the conversation to the system or some other nonesense. Politicians are masters of this game. IT IS A GAME PLAYED TO DIVERT A DISCUSSION AWAY FROM THE ISSUES.
*THAT IS WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.. plain and simple.. you are seeking to make my lack of a signiture the issue, not the points that i raise. Over the past weeks there have only been one or two responses that presented rational differing points of view. *That is a shame. I have certainly raised many issues that need to be discussed.

* So once again I have raised the issue of the board hiding stuff from members.. And now There are those who choose NOT to directly discuss or to comment on THE ISSUE.. but who are trying to say that since i am not putting my name on the idea *the idea is not valid. That is a logic that simply does not stand up and is total bull****.

* So for you two *who are circling the wagons... just how do you feel about the issue??? how do you feel that the board is not being forthcoming and that transparancy is not happening???

* you now know that i am in no way connected commercially or organizationally in any way with soaring. I am a simple pilot who flies often. thats it.

* I also have the experience and ability to understand this mess. *while we are at it.. NO I WILL NOT BE PHYSICALLY ABLE TO RUN FOR DIRECTOR OR TO ASSUME ANY ACTIVE ROLE.. I AM DYING

SCREW YOU GUYS!!!

5bg

* "Jay" wrote in oglegroups.com...
* LOL@Bob - That's what many of us have been saying to him right along.
* It's not that some of what he says doesn't have merit - it's that his
* unwillingness to either identify himself and/or actually get involved
* in fixing things (other than writing complaining posts) is a major
* detraction from any valid points that he might make.

* Bob Kuykendall wrote:
* I think that posting anonymously on that topic falls only a tad shy of
* fulfilling the definition of "irony."

Wooooooowwwwwwwwwww, that revelation makes everything else seem
mundane. Shuts down the spirit a little. So, here I am getting a new
glider , not a care in the world and another is facing the ultimate
personal challenge. So, what do we do.....5-BG, you keep
typing.....everyone knows not to ask who you are....and the discussion
will go on. 5-BG....email me or call, my number is listed in the
members section. Great! My damn dog ate my pie while typing, that
really ****es me off.
5-BG wrote:
OK lets deal with this issue of my name..
1. I am not a member of the board or of any other association or club or part of any commercial interest related in any way to soaring. i am a simple member for past 15 years period end of conversation.
Plain english. I am not speaking with any hidden agenda. If you don't believe that tough **** and put me on ignore.

2. I choose not to post my name for a wide variety of reasons that make a whole lot of sense to me and have absolutly nothing to do with soaring. Not the least of which is that I have terminal cancer and am about to begin some very heavy surgeries (not for the first time), which probably will not be too successful.. OK get it.. i choose not to put my name out there because i do not want my wife to have to deal with wingnuts who took my name off the internet during this time.. That is only reason #1.. there are several others that are frankly none of your stinking business and which have absolutly no connection to soaring and which do not impact the validity of my comments on this board.
SO dig it or put me on ignore.

3. Ideas, opinions and suggestions should be dealt with by a reader based upon their merits and not upon the signiture. That is one of my problems with some organizations (the ssa included, but not exclusively) All too often "BIG NAMES" use their celebrity to branch out . Do you really want Barbara Striesand m making foreign policy? is she really qualified? There are a heck of a l;ot of people who will listen to her or read her ramblings just because she signs them. But in fact isn't it the idea that is important?

My ideas, comments and analysis is offered in a pure form. There are no hidden agendas.
So far the jerks on this board who are circling the wagons around the establishment that took us down this path have sought to divert a reasonable discussion of my ideas and opinions by making a lack of a signiture the issue, NOT THE IDEAS.. I feel sad for the SSA and for those who fall for this well proven tried and true tactic . It is employeed by many people including athletes who get busted for steriods or such and then try to divert the conversation to the system or some other nonesense. Politicians are masters of this game. IT IS A GAME PLAYED TO DIVERT A DISCUSSION AWAY FROM THE ISSUES.
THAT IS WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.. plain and simple.. you are seeking to make my lack of a signiture the issue, not the points that i raise. Over the past weeks there have only been one or two responses that presented rational differing points of view. That is a shame. I have certainly raised many issues that need to be discussed.

So once again I have raised the issue of the board hiding stuff from members.. And now There are those who choose NOT to directly discuss or to comment on THE ISSUE.. but who are trying to say that since i am not putting my name on the idea the idea is not valid. That is a logic that simply does not stand up and is total bull****.

So for you two who are circling the wagons... just how do you feel about the issue??? how do you feel that the board is not being forthcoming and that transparancy is not happening???

you now know that i am in no way connected commercially or organizationally in any way with soaring. I am a simple pilot who flies often. thats it.

I also have the experience and ability to understand this mess. while we are at it.. NO I WILL NOT BE PHYSICALLY ABLE TO RUN FOR DIRECTOR OR TO ASSUME ANY ACTIVE ROLE.. I AM DYING

SCREW YOU GUYS!!!

5bg




"Jay" wrote in message ups.com...
LOL@Bob - That's what many of us have been saying to him right along.
It's not that some of what he says doesn't have merit - it's that his
unwillingness to either identify himself and/or actually get involved
in fixing things (other than writing complaining posts) is a major
detraction from any valid points that he might make.

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
I think that posting anonymously on that topic falls only a tad shy of
fulfilling the definition of "irony."

------=_NextPart_000_0093_01C6F2B7.B4B14050
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Google-AttachSize: 6267

!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"
HTMLHEAD
META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"
META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR
STYLE/STYLE
/HEAD
BODY bgColor=#ffffff
DIVFONT face=ArialOK lets deal with this issue of my name../FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial1. I am not a member of the board or of any other
association or club or part of any commercial interest related in any way to
soaring. i am a simple member for past 15 years period end of
conversation./FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial Plain english. I am not speaking with any hidden
agenda. If you don't believe that tough **** and put me on ignore./FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial2. I choose not to post my name for a wide variety of
reasons that make a whole lot of sense to me and have absolutly nothing to do
with soaring. Not the least of which is that I have terminal cancer  and am
about to begin some very heavy surgeries (not for the first time), which
probably will not be too successful.. OK get it.. i choose not to put my name
out there because i do not want my wife to have to deal with wingnuts who
took my name off the internet  during this time.. That is only reason #1..
there are several others that are frankly none of your stinking business and
which have absolutly no connection to soaring and which do not impact the
validity of my comments on this board./FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial  SO dig it or put me on ignore. /FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial  3. Ideas, opinions and suggestions should be dealt
with by a reader based upon their merits and not upon the signiture. That is one
of my problems with some organizations (the ssa included, but not exclusively)
All too often "BIG NAMES" use their celebrity to branch out .  Do you
really want Barbara Striesand m making foreign policy? is she really qualified?
There are a heck of a l;ot of people who will listen to her or read her
ramblings just because she signs them. But in fact isn't it the idea that is
important?/FONT/DIV
DIV /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial  My ideas, comments and analysis is offered in a
pure form. There are no hidden agendas. /FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial So far the jerks on this board who are circling the
wagons around the establishment that took us down this path have sought to
divert  a reasonable discussion of my ideas and opinions  by making a
lack of a signiture the issue, NOT THE IDEAS.. I feel sad for the SSA and for
those who fall for this  well proven tried and true tactic . It is
employeed by many people including athletes who get busted for steriods or such
and then try to divert the conversation to the system or some other nonesense.
Politicians are masters of this game. IT IS A GAME PLAYED TO DIVERT A
DISCUSSION AWAY FROM THE ISSUES./FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial THAT IS WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.. plain and simple..
you are seeking to make my lack of a signiture the issue, not the points that i
raise. Over the past weeks there have only been one or two responses that
presented rational differing points of view. /FONT FONT face=ArialThat
is a shame. I have certainly raised many issues that need to be
discussed./FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial  So once again I have raised the issue of the board
hiding stuff from members.. And now There are those who choose NOT to directly
discuss or to comment on THE ISSUE.. but who are trying to say that since i am
not putting my name on the idea  the idea is not valid. That is a logic
that simply does not stand up and is total bull****./FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial  So for you two  who are circling the wagons...
just how do you feel about the issue??? how do you feel that the board is not
being forthcoming and that transparancy is not happening???/FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial  you now know that i am in no way connected
commercially or organizationally in any way with soaring. I am a simple pilot
who flies often. thats it./FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial  I also have the experience and ability to
understand this mess.  while we are at it.. NO I WILL NOT BE PHYSICALLY
ABLE TO RUN FOR DIRECTOR OR TO ASSUME ANY ACTIVE ROLE.. I AM
DYING>>/FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=ArialSCREW YOU GUYS!!!/FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial5bg/FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial   /FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=Arial  /FONT/DIV
BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
DIV"Jay" <A /A>
wrote in message A
glegroups.com"news:1161200764.749594.65450@h48g20 00cwc.googlegroups.com/A.../DIVA
href="mailto:LOL@Bob"LOL@Bob/A - That's what many of us have been saying to
him right along.BRIt's not that some of what he says doesn't have merit -
it's that hisBRunwillingness to either identify himself and/or actually get
involvedBRin fixing things (other than writing complaining posts) is a
majorBRdetraction from any valid points that he might make.BRBRBob
Kuykendall wrote:BR> I think that posting anonymously on that topic falls
only a tad shy ofBR> fulfilling the definition of
"irony."BR/BLOCKQUOTE/BODY/HTML

------=_NextPart_000_0093_01C6F2B7.B4B14050--

"5-BG" 5-bghatesspam @ fake.com
wrote I AM DYING



SCREW YOU GUYS!!!



5bg







Hmmm. my troll meter just went off the scale!



Lennie.. Lennie.. Is that you?





Larry Goddard

"01" USA

That explains it all!

Sorry about your health, and I wish you a easy passage to the other side.

--
Hartley Falbaum
"5-BG" 5-bghatesspam @ fake.com wrote in message ...
OK lets deal with this issue of my name..
1. I am not a member of the board or of any other association or club or part of any commercial interest related in any way to soaring. i am a simple member for past 15 years period end of conversation.
Plain english. I am not speaking with any hidden agenda. If you don't believe that tough **** and put me on ignore.

2. I choose not to post my name for a wide variety of reasons that make a whole lot of sense to me and have absolutly nothing to do with soaring. Not the least of which is that I have terminal cancer and am about to begin some very heavy surgeries (not for the first time), which probably will not be too successful.. OK get it.. i choose not to put my name out there because i do not want my wife to have to deal with wingnuts who took my name off the internet during this time.. That is only reason #1.. there are several others that are frankly none of your stinking business and which have absolutly no connection to soaring and which do not impact the validity of my comments on this board.
SO dig it or put me on ignore.

3. Ideas, opinions and suggestions should be dealt with by a reader based upon their merits and not upon the signiture. That is one of my problems with some organizations (the ssa included, but not exclusively) All too often "BIG NAMES" use their celebrity to branch out . Do you really want Barbara Striesand m making foreign policy? is she really qualified? There are a heck of a l;ot of people who will listen to her or read her ramblings just because she signs them. But in fact isn't it the idea that is important?

My ideas, comments and analysis is offered in a pure form. There are no hidden agendas.
So far the jerks on this board who are circling the wagons around the establishment that took us down this path have sought to divert a reasonable discussion of my ideas and opinions by making a lack of a signiture the issue, NOT THE IDEAS.. I feel sad for the SSA and for those who fall for this well proven tried and true tactic . It is employeed by many people including athletes who get busted for steriods or such and then try to divert the conversation to the system or some other nonesense. Politicians are masters of this game. IT IS A GAME PLAYED TO DIVERT A DISCUSSION AWAY FROM THE ISSUES.
THAT IS WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.. plain and simple.. you are seeking to make my lack of a signiture the issue, not the points that i raise. Over the past weeks there have only been one or two responses that presented rational differing points of view. That is a shame. I have certainly raised many issues that need to be discussed.

So once again I have raised the issue of the board hiding stuff from members.. And now There are those who choose NOT to directly discuss or to comment on THE ISSUE.. but who are trying to say that since i am not putting my name on the idea the idea is not valid. That is a logic that simply does not stand up and is total bull****.

So for you two who are circling the wagons... just how do you feel about the issue??? how do you feel that the board is not being forthcoming and that transparancy is not happening???

you now know that i am in no way connected commercially or organizationally in any way with soaring. I am a simple pilot who flies often. thats it.

I also have the experience and ability to understand this mess. while we are at it.. NO I WILL NOT BE PHYSICALLY ABLE TO RUN FOR DIRECTOR OR TO ASSUME ANY ACTIVE ROLE.. I AM DYING

SCREW YOU GUYS!!!

5bg




"Jay" wrote in message ups.com...
LOL@Bob - That's what many of us have been saying to him right along.
It's not that some of what he says doesn't have merit - it's that his
unwillingness to either identify himself and/or actually get involved
in fixing things (other than writing complaining posts) is a major
detraction from any valid points that he might make.

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
I think that posting anonymously on that topic falls only a tad shy of
fulfilling the definition of "irony."

5-BG,

I caught some flak from certain SSA directors because early on in the
rec.aviation.soaring wars after SSA's first disclosure, I began
referring to you as "one of the few guys there who really gets it."
Later I thought you went too far on some of your conspiracy theories.
And your often confrontational and abrasive style rubbed even those who
shared some of your views the wrong way. But you clearly were one of
the early ones to understand what many of the real issues were in this
scandal.

At this point, however, I have to say: "you've made the sale; now stop
selling." The Board and ExComm agreed to allow us to set up an
independent group to monitor ExComm's (and the short-term Emergency
Business Plan Task Force's) activities. As announced, that group has
been set up (Tom Dixon, Misti Roland, and David Pixton) and they've
been attending (dialing into) ExComm meetings for some weeks. There are
still a few details of the actual charter to be resolved but I
understand ExComm and the Review Task Force (as it's now called) are
close. I say "I understand" because Richard Kellerman and I backed away
from active participation after determining we'd found three excellent
people for the RTF.

That's the nature of representative democracy. I don't want ExComm or
the EBPTF to keep us up to date on every little thing they say or do.
Nor should they. Having confidence that those two groups (which have
heavy overlap in membership) know what they're doing should (in a
perfect world) reassure me that they'll do the right thing. Knowing
there's a third party watching them every step of the way lets me sleep
at night in this imperfect world.

RTF was set up to ensure none of the inherent conflicts of interest
that exist (we've talked that one to death) push ExComm the wrong way.
Now that RTF is operating, I've stopped posting on this subject. We got
what we asked for and needed, although not before I damaged my personal
reputation with some folks on the Board, and probably in the membership
at large, by "going public" with my concerns. I suggest now that unless
you have new information, you accept partial credit for helping push
SSA in the right direction and focus your attention on what, from your
perspective, are undoubtedly far more serious issues.

If the Board, ExComm, or any other SSA group gives us reason to
question whether they're operating competently and in good faith, I'll
be among the first to ask for an explanation, disclosure, and/or
change. To date, however, the process appears to be working. It took us
a while to get where we are but I believe we're on the right track now.

Chip Bearden

chip;

Thank you for the civil response.
i would like for you to consider parts of your note from a different perspective.
1. I have quit selling and accepted as a done deal many things that obviously are now in motion that i do not personally believe are being handled in a way that is best for the ssa. I have raised the issues and the board went a different way. Putting the issues out there, hopefully , resulted in a discussion at the board level. But a course has been set and changing now seems to be something that will not happen, nor should it.

"That's the nature of representative democracy"
2. I really beg to differ with you on this statement as it goes right to the heart of the last very important issue that i sought to raise. Please allow me a moment for a civics lesson. "sunshine" laws are in affect in a very large portion of local, state and even in federal government legislative bodies. Some are more stringent than others. There are provisions for executive sessions to discuss classified and personell matters that are sensitive and would do harm to the process if discussed publically. The Press does its damndest to gain information and we have all seen this movie played out in the national news.
Chip, my point is that representative democracy, as practiced in the UNITED STATES has evolved into a model in which the "members" demand information and are generally privey to the inner discussions that go into the actual decision making . This is particularly evident during an election year as each party brings out the discussion on every issue that they think will win votes for their cause. Our nation will listen to this discussion, and other things, and make a collective decision in a couple of weeks over who will constitute the elective body that will make the decisions .
As citizens we expect to be informed of the debate going on and have enacted laws to mandate sunshine to insure that this information is available.. The press acts as the watchdog. When the system gets cute, someone leaks information and it gets out in spite of even the president's wishes!!!
Conflicts of interest are currently being featured in national press as are other indescretions. it is PART OF THE PROCESS by which the body politic causes the elected representatives in a representative democracy to represent their collective needs and to force change when the entrenched decision makers stray too far away from what the majority of the voters ( members) want.

Ok, I am not suggesting that the members vote on every little issue. I am no longer suggesting a different model for dealing with the situation. I have been outvoted on the board level and there are no provisions for a recall election in the bylaws ( you might suggest that as a change).
"The Board and ExComm agreed to allow us to set up an
independent group to monitor ExComm's (and the short-term Emergency
Business Plan Task Force's) activities. "
HOW NICE OF THEM!!!
That is fine. BUT it wouldn't fly in the representative democracy that governs most local,state and federal lawmakers. In my view, the watchdogs appointed are in the role of the press. But aside from this board,and your going public ( which is similar to the NY TIMES printing a story on secret prisons or govt evesdropping), you really don't have much of a forum. The forum exists within the ssa members section. I suggest that the monitors use it often.
But the real issue now on the table is the sudden stop in posting the minutes of the excom and the board . it simply gives the appearance that something is going on that is not being disclosed. Additionally, the sanitized draft minutes which have deleted the obviously contentious discussionss between yourself and the board is also not consistant with a representative democracy that operates under sunshine rules that are in place through out our political system.
Corporate governance is a bit different than political governance. non profit governance a bit different still.
It is my opinion that the board should post the minutes of each meeting ( excom too) promptly and include the pros and cons of MAJOR issues and even perhaps a listing of how the vote went by members on the really big issues. I am NOT suggesting that every little thing be discussed with the members, but certainly there have been some very very large issues decided and plans taken, some with an obvious split and after heated discussion, that we really have no idea about.

So far the board has taken a paternalistic rather than an open position re information. We have been given information, but not nearly enough and no insight into the debate.

It is my opinion that in a representative democracy, the members have a need and the right to have such insights. Especially in an organization that is voluntary in terms of membership and undergoing a major restructuring. Members have to want to belong.

The "trust us" model, enhanced by the appointement of watchdogs is the model that we are clearly working on at this moment.
The members were not given a choice. we were not even really made privy to the discussion surrounding the decision to go this route. That is not the way a representative democracy works long term .
I am clearly proposing that information be SHARED and not HOARDED or guarded. It will come out anyway.. it is good that we have monitors to the process, but the members should have more information and the board should be very careful of creating the impression among the membership that things are being done behind closed doors. The APPEARANCE of openness is very important. without it it is my belief that a portion of the membership will become disaffected.
bottom line post the minutes, and include in the minutes a frank disclosure of opposing points of view. it is OK to present minutes that reflect a difference in opinion. they do not have to present each issue as a unamious decision .

"If the Board, ExComm, or any other SSA group gives us reason to
question whether they're operating competently and in good faith, I'll
be among the first to ask for an explanation, disclosure, and/or
change.

If by US you mean the general membership, we have only the minutes and several carefully written summary notes to go on. If you mean the watchdogs, i certainly hope that they are on it.

Finally, i am not suggesting that every little thing be disclosed. But i have a real problem with recent major decisions being taken in a paternalistic manner. I would hope that the board will consider my suggestion that they error on the side of more, rather than less information.
thank you

5bg




wrote in message oups.com...
5-BG,

I caught some flak from certain SSA directors because early on in the
rec.aviation.soaring wars after SSA's first disclosure, I began
referring to you as "one of the few guys there who really gets it."
Later I thought you went too far on some of your conspiracy theories.
And your often confrontational and abrasive style rubbed even those who
shared some of your views the wrong way. But you clearly were one of
the early ones to understand what many of the real issues were in this
scandal.

At this point, however, I have to say: "you've made the sale; now stop
selling." The Board and ExComm agreed to allow us to set up an
independent group to monitor ExComm's (and the short-term Emergency
Business Plan Task Force's) activities. As announced, that group has
been set up (Tom Dixon, Misti Roland, and David Pixton) and they've
been attending (dialing into) ExComm meetings for some weeks. There are
still a few details of the actual charter to be resolved but I
understand ExComm and the Review Task Force (as it's now called) are
close. I say "I understand" because Richard Kellerman and I backed away
from active participation after determining we'd found three excellent
people for the RTF.

That's the nature of representative democracy. I don't want ExComm or
the EBPTF to keep us up to date on every little thing they say or do.
Nor should they. Having confidence that those two groups (which have
heavy overlap in membership) know what they're doing should (in a
perfect world) reassure me that they'll do the right thing. Knowing
there's a third party watching them every step of the way lets me sleep
at night in this imperfect world.

RTF was set up to ensure none of the inherent conflicts of interest
that exist (we've talked that one to death) push ExComm the wrong way.
Now that RTF is operating, I've stopped posting on this subject. We got
what we asked for and needed, although not before I damaged my personal
reputation with some folks on the Board, and probably in the membership
at large, by "going public" with my concerns. I suggest now that unless
you have new information, you accept partial credit for helping push
SSA in the right direction and focus your attention on what, from your
perspective, are undoubtedly far more serious issues.

If the Board, ExComm, or any other SSA group gives us reason to
question whether they're operating competently and in good faith, I'll
be among the first to ask for an explanation, disclosure, and/or
change. To date, however, the process appears to be working. It took us
a while to get where we are but I believe we're on the right track now.

Chip Bearden