transparancy/member information

This post is not directed at hretting:

This thread has been a good lesson, and hopefully a
humbling one, for those who assume and ascribe the
worst possible motives to those whom they don't know
and have never met. We who post should remember this
and respect the dignity of those with whom we disagree
-- however strong the disagreement!

Even at war, diplomacy and rules have a place.



At 04:00 19 October 2006, wrote:
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 news:1161200764.749594.65450@h48g2000cw
c.googlegroups.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








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




style='PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT:
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT:
0px'
'Jay'
wrote in message href='news:1161200764.749594.65450@h48g2000
cwc.googlegroups.com'news:1161200764.749594.65
legroups.com... href='mailto:LOL@Bob'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 hisunwillingness to either identify himself
and/or actually get
involvedin fixing things (other than writing complaining
posts) is a
majordetraction 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--

Nyal Williams wrote:
This post is not directed at hretting:

This thread has been a good lesson, and hopefully a
humbling one, for those who assume and ascribe the
worst possible motives to those whom they don't know
and have never met. We who post should remember this
and respect the dignity of those with whom we disagree
-- however strong the disagreement!

Even at war, diplomacy and rules have a place.


This ain't war this is RAS !!

Ask a question-get everything but the answer
Post an observation or opinion-expect an attack

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

At 18:42 19 October 2006, wrote:

This ain't war this is RAS !!

Ask a question-get everything but the answer
Post an observation or opinion-expect an attack


I recognize the irony in your post. It's a pity that
many of those who have the most to offer never appear
here -- most likely because of all the diatribe.

Well,

I hate to be the one to say what many are probably thinking, but it's
just gotten too absurd to ignore.

1.) I'm almost positive I know who 5-BG is. I won't say because if this
person wants to hide behind such an absurdity, that's his/her choice.
It certainly doesn't build any credibility.

2.) I personally don't believe the diatribe that he/she posted earlier.
If it is true, I'll apologise, but only if this person identifies
him/herself. I would never make fun of someone's agony, nor am I making
fun of this serious situation.

Sorry if that upsets anyone, but there it is. I'm really sorry that
5-BG thinks that we're all that impressed with his/her opinion, and
that so many are so ready to read his/her opinions. These trolls are
really counterproductive. The SSA leadership is doing what's possible
to get this resolved. Any ambition that I might ever have had to try to
help or serve the SSA membership has been squashed, not just by this
one, but he/she has developed a following. Are any of you really that
naive? I'm sure I'm not alone in that regard, either.

The basis of my opinion, besides knowing this person, is...

I was the baseball commissioner in a small town when my sons were
young. The parents that complained the loudest were the ones that never
came to work day, never coached, and just dropped their brats off for
us to babysit during practice or games... full of opinions and
criticism... but always full of excuses why they couldn't help or
volunteer... how absurd... The same types of folks can be found at
most clubs where volunteerism is so desperately needed. However they
think it's a country club... just come out and fly... don't forget to
bitch if things don't go according to your whims. If the glider's
dirty, they'll let some volunteer officer know in spades, but they
would die before they'd wash it.

I've known several board members in my lifetime, and I know some of the
current ones. Their credibility stands head and shoulders above any
anonymous, ****ed off poster that has nothing but criticism for these
hard-working volunteers.

One who doesn't hide... my opinions are my own... and certainly not
swayed by someone posting diatribes, and obscenities in caps.

Have a nice day...

Jack Womack