![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Frank Reid wrote: I have made no speculation about what the excom did nor what their motivation was. Nor have I made any comments as to what the boards motivation was. Now Frank, if you claim to know something without any evidence to back it up, some people might call that speculating.I was not just refering to you here, but alot of the people who have posted on RAS.You did claim that the motivation for ignoring the bylaws was stupidity.That sounds like speculating to me. I have on the other hand read all the board minutes from 2002 foreward and there is no mention at all about an audit, much less some sort of vote or discussion. I have also corresponded with many of the board members and to the entire current excom. Each and every one agrees. There was no vote, no discussion, and no decision of any kind about an audit. You have to read the post from 5BG on this one. Here again, how do you know why they chose to ignore the bylaws. This sentence is what is known as begging the question. You apparently cannot accept that the board did not make a decision on the audit. So I will say it again. The board did not make a decision of any kind about the audit and therefore, in no way did "they chose to ignore the bylaws". If you insist on making that statement the premise of your comments then you have already declared them guilty of some "big bad conspiracy". Is that what you really mean to do? First of all, I can accept the fact that a mistake was made. The fact that it was made three years in a row is a bit of a stretch.I dont believe in a conspiracy (Yea, I know, now I am SPECULATING that there was no conspiracy (grin)), but I would like to know why Dennis Wright knew his CFO was not abiding by the law and chose not to do anything about it for 3 years. As above I have made no comment as to the motivation(s) of anyone. I have been addressing the volunteer SSA Board members and nowhere have I even mentioned the paid staff including the ED and the CFAO. So tell me Alice, do you have trouble sticking to a topic or did you just throw this in as "smoke"? Now work with me here Frank, it took alot of people to dig this hole.Arent you the least bit curiuos why the checks and balances that were put into place after the last fiasco didnt work here?3 years in a row? With all due respect, Alice, I have made no speculation. I have told you facts that you have decided are speculation. However, since you want to call my comments speculation please tell us all what you know that makes what I have said speculation instead of fact. With comments like "Nothing more nothing less", you are just expressing your opinion as I have been expressing mine.Isnt that what part of what this board is for?For some reason you like to call your opinions facts.Now I realize the people on the board are hard working buddies of yours, and this might raise strong feelings for you when their accountability is called into question, but all you have given us is your OPINION of why they did not see fit to follow the bylaws. Additionally, what would you call someone who, before this grand investigation has concluded, has accused the Board of Directors of the following: "they chose to ignore the bylaws"? And before you answer make sure you know the definition of the word "chose". It is the past tense of "choose - to select freely and after consideration, to decide on esp. by vote". Are you sure you want to accuse the SSA Board of Directors of this action? Or is it just possible that you have been speculating just a little on your own? OK Frank, lets get wrapped up in semantics here.The bylaws were not followed!!!The people who were elected and trusted to follow them didnt!!!Where is the speculation in that statement? Indeed, your "hatch may just blow" if you continue to accuse the Board without absolute proof of your acccusations. Regards, Frank Reid Are you threatening me?What are you gonna do, fly to Salt Lake and kick my ass?I always thought this board was for the free exchange of questions and ideasand opinions, but then there are posters like you, who post nothing but facts while the rest of us are just speculating.And then you have to end your post with a physical threat.Dude, did you get your meds today? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Important update from SSA | [email protected] | Soaring | 24 | October 6th 06 04:42 PM |
Anti-Noise Nuts Take Over Truckee-Tahoe Airport | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 13 | November 18th 05 09:37 AM |
18 Oct 2005 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | October 19th 05 02:19 AM |
Bush's Attempt to Usurp the Constitution | WalterM140 | Military Aviation | 20 | July 2nd 04 04:09 PM |
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 12th 03 11:01 PM |