wrote:
T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:

As an SSA member since 1971 I think it's stupid to limit

I was one of the first to object to the member who reposted Dianne
Black-Nixon's letter to RAS. The reason was primarily because of the
arrogance with which he said, in effect, "I know what's better for the
organization than any of you" and apparently in a very few minutes.

Chip, why kill the messenger if you dont like the message


I assumed the ExComm had good reasons for attempting to make the news
available, at least initially, only to SSA members (though the request
for members to view the announcement was widely disseminated, including
on RAS).
Where was this stated Chip.Why would D. Black Nixon post on a public
forum if she wanted this private?

The same goes for the posters who have mouthed off with gross
generalizations about incompetence and pronouncements about accounting,
tax codes, and law without having the facts to support what are clearly
assumptions, interpretations, or opinions (though they are often not
stated as such).
So Chip, are you the only one allowed an opinion?Where were posters on
RAS wrong about tax law?You need to read the update posted on the SSA
website Sept 7th.

. Given what's been disclosed
and the ruckus that ensued, it's probably better if this and future
Updates were published on a public area of the SSA site.

Now you are contradicting yourself.

But, like you, I'll go along with the ExComm's implicit request to keep
their letter on the SSA site for the time being. I'm willing to give
them and the full board the opportunity to do the right thing in what
is very dark hour for soaring in the U.S.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
I think "going along" is what got the SSA in trouble in the first
place.Dont be so self righteous about the other posters.The SSA
management has alot to answer for, and in the best interest of the
sport they should probably all resign. Your blind devotion to these
people is part of the problem.
A