oct 2 report to members

5-BG wrote:


A faceless member (5bg)


Or said another way (and a more accurate way) a charter member of the
CGCC (Chicken**** Gutless Cowards Club). 5BG is hereby appointed to be
the ED and the Chair (will not use the word man as it certainly does
not apply to 5BG) of the CGCC Pete dot dot dot has volunteered to be
the CFO. No doubt the new club will have no meetings as the members
would have to show their faces. Rather it will be an internet club
where each can bitch and whine without identifying themselves to each
other. Anyone want to be members of the club? All you have to do is
be too chicken**** and gutless to sign your posts. You instantly
become a member. Step up and join the CGCC. Pete dot dot dot is
waiting to collect the dues.

Warmest Regards.

Frank Reid

Frank Reid wrote:
Or said another way (and a more accurate way) a charter member of the
CGCC (Chicken**** Gutless Cowards Club). 5BG is hereby appointed to be
the ED and the Chair (will not use the word man as it certainly does
not apply to 5BG) of the CGCC Pete dot dot dot has volunteered to be
the CFO. No doubt the new club will have no meetings as the members
would have to show their faces. Rather it will be an internet club
where each can bitch and whine without identifying themselves to each
other. Anyone want to be members of the club? All you have to do is
be too chicken**** and gutless to sign your posts. You instantly
become a member. Step up and join the CGCC. Pete dot dot dot is
waiting to collect the dues.

Real mature Frank.I am pretty new to RAS and already I have noticed
there are two kinds of people who post here.Those who have something
constructive to ad (The vast majority), and people like you who just
want to sling mud.Judging by your posts on other threads, you like very
much to engage in personal attacks without anything constructive to
ad.How about it Frank, no personal attacks here, lets see you debate
5BG's post on an adult level.

Warmest Regards.

Frank Reid

Is this the F.R. who runs Bermuda Soaring?Holly cow dude, think of how
mature this looks to your customers.And another thing, can we watch the
language?I have a picture of my kids here on my computer desk!

Warmest Regards,
K Urban

5-BG wrote:
.. I am not a contest pilot. I have not been active in any ssa
governance. I am a simple member and have been to many years. one of
the faceless many who feel abused and ignored by the high profile "big
names" who ran this organization for their personal aggrandizement and
ultimately into the ground.

Dear 5-BG,

It's a shame that you discredit your good ideas with the above sorts of
crap. As a person who has, over the last 20 odd years, spent countless
hours on boards of various non-profit organizations for no pay and zero
aggrandizement, I couldn't blame every one of our directors for saying
"f*** this crap" and resigning en mass. With people like you to (not)
pick up the ball, where would that leave us?

Let me remind you of what our "big name" directors are getting out of
this mess:

- The right to spend approximately $2,000 out of their own pockets to
fly to various garden spots around the country for board meetings 3 or
4 times per year.
- The right to give up weekends with family, loved ones, fellow glider
pilots
- The right to spend countless hours not working on their business
interests or leisure time interests while they work on your behalf.

None of the above excuses the board as a whole or any individual on
that board for the current mess. However, at least in my book, it buys
them the right to my continued support and forebearance until all of
the facts are known and proposals for the future are presented.

So, how 'bout it 5-BG? Since you have all the answers, and by your
reckoning the time is right, can we count on seeing your name on the
next BOD ballot? I'll be glad to nominate you.

Regards,
Erik Mann

5-BG
You seem to be familiar with the concept of "slapp suit".
It causes me to wonder, are you or have you ever been the slappER or the slappEE?
Which could it be?
Or is it merely in your dreams?
Cheers! Pete :=)
PS. This is in no way meant to be a personal attack, I'd just like to know where you got the idea. P.
"5-BG" 5-bghatesspam @ fake.com wrote in message ...
peter you wrote" reaction by many is,
"We have to rearrange the deck chairs".
Another reaction, mainly by life members and insiders who presided over this mess is to attack people who raise valid points, not on the substance of their message but on the trivial issue of whether or not they choose to identify themselves in a public forum. I choose not to place my name on posts for what I consider to be personal and very valid reasons. My signature should have very little to do with the points I raise. I am a nobody in the soaring community. While some may recognize my name from outside the soaring community arena, my identity has no import within the soaring community. I am not a contest pilot. I have not been active in any ssa governance. I am a simple member and have been to many years. one of the faceless many who feel abused and ignored by the high profile "big names" who ran this organization for their personal aggrandizement and ultimately into the ground.
The soaring society inside establishment has rallied to the defense of the status quo and seeks to deflect the discussion to that of who is posting what.
The issues are real. The train wreck is getting worse. The hole is getting deeper. The general membership is, imho, getting more disenfranchised by the day. Accountability is being shifted. responsibility diffused. Committees are being formed to study the problem.
information is being withheld and then only brought out a bit at a time. Case in point.. I just read the recently posted excom minutes which reveal that a donation of 84,000 was diverted and most of it never made it to fidelity. This info came to light just a week or so after the excom and treasurer gave assurances that all foundation money was accounted for. 84 grand is a sizeable chunk. how could they miss this???
when you cannot dispute the message with logic and facts, attack the messenger on a personal level.
I read in the bylaws "
ARTICLE VI - SUSPENSION, EXPULSION, ETC.

SECTION 1 - Any member may be dropped from the roll of membership for nonpayment of dues; and any member whose activities are deemed hostile to the objectives or injurious to the purpose of the Society, or who violates its bylaws or established rules, may be removed from office, suspended or expelled from the Society by vote of the Board of Directors. "

I guess that means me if the board decides that it doesn't like criticism.. I am openly hostile to the objectives of the current board which I perceive to be self preservation and limiting personal responsibility. .

BUT WHO THROWS OUT THE BOARD if it knowingly and willfully violates the bylaws???

SECTION 2 - Annually, after the close of the fiscal year, the books and accounts shall be audited by an independent accounting firm and the findings and opinions of the firm published and distributed to the Directors, and to others requesting same.



THE BOARD CLEARLY VIOLATED THE BYLAWS.. no ands ifs or buts.. They are clearly in conflict of interest as section one specifies that the board has the power to throw out anyone who violates the bylaws.. There were no provisions for members to institute a recall process..

so the ssa is stuck with a board that is making decisions for the future that has the power to expel any with a hostile attitude but that also has the sole power to judge itself. The LEGITIMACY of this board and excom is seriously in question.



THIS SUCKS..

So I suggest to those of you who are life members, big names, directors, and insiders, that you consider the points raised by the faceless masses that you have for so long considered a necessary evil to be tolerated because they pay dues to support your self aggrandizing efforts and pet projects. . I challenge you right now to address my conclusion that the current board should be tossed out on the basis of the bylaws.

By the way, I also read in recent minutes that the excom is going to change the bylaws to eliminate the requirement for an annual audit.. NOW THIS MAKES A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE given recent events.. but then, they are vested with the power ( sole) to change bylaws. too bad they cannot make change retroactive..

this trainwreck is getting worse by the day. a measure of just how much worse is the degree to which insiders try to deflect meaningful questions, opinions and analysis by attacking a nobody on a personal basis because he exercises his right not to divulge his name in a public forum.



Perhaps you should google on SLAPP SUIT for a reasonable explanation of the desire to remain faceless.

so to all you big names, directors,life members and other insiders who don't want to deal with the train wreck, SCREW YOU VERY MUCH

A faceless member (5bg)





A




wrote in message oups.com...
Frank:
"Identify yourself or shut the F#*# up!"

No one can accuse the soaring community of not having any manners,
class or character.

It's amazing to watch this SSA fiasco take place. It's the classic
train wreck. What confuses me is why ANY SSA member would have an
ounce of faith in the management or board of the SSA after what has
transpired.

The membership has been abused and robbed and the reaction by many is,
"We have to rearrange the deck chairs".

I hope that the IRS and the State of New Mexico levies the MAXIMUM
penalty against the SSA since this is what the organization deserves.
The SSA broke the rules and should suffer the consequences.

But that's the rub, I guess responsibility is not in fashion these
days.


Frank Reid wrote:
Everyone and everything in the SSA should, according to you, be open
and transparent, yet you hide behind your nickname of 5-BG. You have
been asked several times to speak up and tell us who you are. That is
the one area of conversation that you avoid. Seems to be a double
standard here, don't you think? Are you scared to let us know who you
are? Are you ashamed of who you are? What the hell is with you?
Identify yourself or shut the F#*# up!!

Come on chicken speak up or shut up!

Warmest Regards,

Frank Reid

So that my friends among soaring, who know that I can be very outspoken at
times, do not think that 5-BG is me. I will tell you that, I sign all my
posts, and I am not one to go off half cocked and not list my name. If I say
it, I will say it to your face.

With that said, I also do not agree with a full house cleaning of the SSA
EXComm. They decided to do this by themselves, so I guess that we will all
have to live with it. BUT, anyone who knows these people know that they were
duped bigtime while trying to do a thankless job. I have watched over the
years as Diane and her husband have worked tirelessly to raise funds for the
world team, and to better soaring as a whole. To take blanket shots at her
now is just without education, or common respect enough to get to know her
and the rest of the EXCOMM for that matter. I REPEAT what I said earlier.
Tone it down, and let them do their jobs. Every single one of you that has
been so short and quick to critisize, had better have their names on for
director the next election. Otherwise, I second what Frank Reid said, in
just as strong of language, and I will not be afraid to say that to your
face!!!! Shame on all of you!!!!!

Brian Glick
Mifflin, PA

"Frank Reid" wrote in message
oups.com...

Everyone and everything in the SSA should, according to you, be open
and transparent, yet you hide behind your nickname of 5-BG. You have
been asked several times to speak up and tell us who you are. That is
the one area of conversation that you avoid. Seems to be a double
standard here, don't you think? Are you scared to let us know who you
are? Are you ashamed of who you are? What the hell is with you?
Identify yourself or shut the F#*# up!!

Come on chicken speak up or shut up!

Warmest Regards,

Frank Reid

to brian glick and frank reid and others.

There are two possible reasons that I can see for your fixation on the signature to posts.
1. you are trying to divert the discussion from its essence and to make the poster(me) the issue. A tried and proven Washington political tactic that does not work.
2, you are truly ignorant of the tradition of anomoninity that exists in the UNITED STATES.

I can do nothing if you fall into the first camp, but can offer a reasoned discussion of the tradition that exists within the United States that encourages and protects free and anonymous speech. read on if you choose to be enlightened. if your motive is to divert, hit delete now.

Within our country ( USA) there has evolved a tradition, that is protected, which encourages anonymous information to be disseminated. Whether you be a FOX watcher or a NY TIMES reader, your news is often derived from UNNAMED HIGH ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS, or unnamed elected officials, or unnamed government functionaries who speak on condition of remaining unnamed. It is the reporters job to verify the accuracy of the information, not to reveal the name.
Bob Woodward brought down the Nixon administration with the information supplied by DEEP THROAT. History is replete with many many instances of unnamed sources blowing the whistle on government wrongdoing.
WHILE I do NOT condone the leaking of legitimately classified national security information, as this is a criminal offense, the anonymous leaking of information is a widely practiced art of national and local politics. Overclassification ( read adjourning to administrative session)) is also a practiced art of a government that is seeking to hide information from the public. Likewise of a board that is seeking to control a situation.

Bush hates unauthorized leaks, but makes liberal use of deep background discussions between high officials ( such as dick cheney) to get a message out . no names are attached.. does that make the information invalid?

The US Senate has a rule which permits a Senator to place an ANONYMOUS HOLD on a bill or appointment. Nothing will happen until the hold is removed and the senator's name is not made public. This is an old tradition and has a real basis in logic.
I could go on and on, but the point is that the IDEAS and opinions are what should be subject to debate. Adding a name is basically irrelevant unless one wants to enhance an argument by evoking an association to a specific name.

There are MANY reasons that a poster to this board might nor want to sign his name.
1. He may be a sitting judge.
2. he may be a local or national politician with an interest in soaring who does not want this issue to be introduced by his political opponents.
3. He may be a political staffer or appointee who , by way of his position, may have some distant possible conflict should his principal be called upon to enact legislation revelant to the SSA.
4. He may be an ssa member who works for the IRS, the NM tax people or the NM ag.. who wants to send an unofficial message to the membership of the ssa that the **** is about to hit the fan.
5. he may be a pilot who is seeking a berth on the national team who does not want to risk offending the powers that be.
6. He may have a commercial interest in soaring and does not want to risk his business base, but has personal feelings.
7. He may be a director of the ssa who is seeking to go against the flow and to affect change, but is running into the establishment.
8. he may just be a member who is genuinely ****ed off at the way things have gone and who has reached the point of speaking out and "tipping at windmills" a la Don Quixote.

NONE of these ( and many more) reasons add or subtract one little bit from the IDEAS, and OPINIONS presented by someone who exercises his right to remain anonymous. You retain the right to hit the delete button. it is a free country.

BUT be clear, seeking to divert the discussion does absolutely NOTHING towards resolving the problem or to clear the tracks of the train wreck that is in progress. Your obsession with who I am and not with my thoughts, opinions and cited facts is a clear indication that you seek to protect the establishment by diverting the conversation.
If you have learned anything from recent current events it should be that the facts and ideas that are presented anonymously follow a separate track from the discussion of who divulged the information. In the long run, it matters little who blows the whistle on government abuse of authority, it is the national discussion of the abuse that matters. The national discussion of NSA eavesdropping, of CIA secret prisons, Of homeland security regulations, of giving up individual rights towards the goal of counterterrorism of many other issues will be resolved at the polls very soon. unnamed leakers and off the record opinions play a big roll in the outcome. Both parties seek political advantage and use unnamed sources.

we are discussing abuse. it does not matter who I am. it is the discussion of a tradition of abuse that has evolved within the ssa among the INSIDERS that is in question. It is the discussion of how to change the organization to make it more relevant to the general membership that matters.
You mention that the chair and her husband have worked tirelessly to raise funds for the national team. That is a nice project. it is, however not relevant to my interests. Was her devotion to this task such that other projects were shortchanged? was I asked as a member if I approved of this project? It is my clear view that the "insiders who run the show" are committed to a set of values which may be diverging from that of the general membership.

So challenge my facts, disagree with my opinions, but park the bull**** attacks on me for not signing my name. As I said, that is either a transparent diversionary tactic, or ignorance.

a concerned ssa member.






"Brian Glick" wrote in message ink.net...
So that my friends among soaring, who know that I can be very outspoken at
times, do not think that 5-BG is me. I will tell you that, I sign all my
posts, and I am not one to go off half cocked and not list my name. If I say
it, I will say it to your face.

With that said, I also do not agree with a full house cleaning of the SSA
EXComm. They decided to do this by themselves, so I guess that we will all
have to live with it. BUT, anyone who knows these people know that they were
duped bigtime while trying to do a thankless job. I have watched over the
years as Diane and her husband have worked tirelessly to raise funds for the
world team, and to better soaring as a whole. To take blanket shots at her
now is just without education, or common respect enough to get to know her
and the rest of the EXCOMM for that matter. I REPEAT what I said earlier.
Tone it down, and let them do their jobs. Every single one of you that has
been so short and quick to critisize, had better have their names on for
director the next election. Otherwise, I second what Frank Reid said, in
just as strong of language, and I will not be afraid to say that to your
face!!!! Shame on all of you!!!!!

Brian Glick
Mifflin, PA

"Frank Reid" wrote in message
oups.com...

Everyone and everything in the SSA should, according to you, be open
and transparent, yet you hide behind your nickname of 5-BG. You have
been asked several times to speak up and tell us who you are. That is
the one area of conversation that you avoid. Seems to be a double
standard here, don't you think? Are you scared to let us know who you
are? Are you ashamed of who you are? What the hell is with you?
Identify yourself or shut the F#*# up!!

Come on chicken speak up or shut up!

Warmest Regards,

Frank Reid

5-BG wrote:
There are MANY reasons that a poster to this board might nor want to sign his name.
1. He may be a sitting judge.
2. he may be a local or national politician with an interest in soaring who does not want this issue to be introduced by his political opponents.
3. He may be a political staffer or appointee who , by way of his position, may have some distant possible conflict should his principal be called upon to enact legislation revelant to the SSA.
4. He may be an ssa member who works for the IRS, the NM tax people or the NM ag.. who wants to send an unofficial message to the membership of the ssa that the **** is about to hit the fan.
5. he may be a pilot who is seeking a berth on the national team who does not want to risk offending the powers that be.
6. He may have a commercial interest in soaring and does not want to risk his business base, but has personal feelings.
7. He may be a director of the ssa who is seeking to go against the flow and to affect change, but is running into the establishment.
8. he may just be a member who is genuinely ****ed off at the way things have gone and who has reached the point of speaking out and "tipping at windmills" a la Don Quixote.


THE TEN TOP REASONS WHY 5BG WILL NOT SIGN HIS NAME TO HIS POSTS

10. HE IS REALLY JUDGE JUDY

9. HE IS A US REPRESENTATIVE, RECENTLY IN THE NEWS, AND WOULD LIKE TO
WORK WITH THE YOUTH IN SOARING

8. HE IS REALLY A PAGE WHO WORKED FOR THE ABOVE REFERRED TO
CONGRESSMAN.

7. HE IS DOUG JACOBS

6. HE OWNS THREE MAJOR SORING OPERATIONS IN THE US AND DOES NOT WANT
TO JEOPARDIZE THE MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS HE IS MAKING

5. HE IS REALLY A SHE - NAMELY DIANNE BLACK-NIXON

4. HE IS DENNIS WRIGHT

3. HE IS A RAG HEAD FROM THE MIDDLE EAST TRYING TO CAUSE TROUBLE IN
THE US

2. HE IS CHAIRMAN OF THE SSA FOUNDATION AND WANTS TO KEEP THAT MONEY
FOR HIMSELF

AND THE NUMBER ONE REASON WHY 5BG WILL NOT SIGN HIS POSTS IS:

1. HE IS JUST AN OBNOXIOUS, LOUD MOUTHED MEMBER OFTHE SSA WHO REALLY
IS A CHICKEN**** GUTLESS
COWARD WHO DOES NOT HAVE THE CONVICTION NOR COURAGE NOR BALLS TO
SIGN HIS POSTS!!

Warmest Regards to All,

Frank Reid

Ok, having lurked, read, or mulled over all that is being written I do
need to say this last post is what is bad about RAS and this internet
stuff. Would you in a public meeting, use this kind of language to
persuade others? I know almost no one personally on this group, yet I
know who I would at least listen to if I met them. This is language I
hear at school and have to correct all the time...since most kids have
very limited verbal skills when making emotional comments. A little
skunk one said if ya can't say nothin nice, then don't say nothin at
all. Voice your concerns, leave the poor language to the people that
can think of no other way to express themselves.

Larry Johnson SSA member
Frank Reid wrote:
5-BG wrote:
There are MANY reasons that a poster to this board might nor want to sign his name.
1. He may be a sitting judge.
2. he may be a local or national politician with an interest in soaring who does not want this issue to be introduced by his political opponents.
3. He may be a political staffer or appointee who , by way of his position, may have some distant possible conflict should his principal be called upon to enact legislation revelant to the SSA.
4. He may be an ssa member who works for the IRS, the NM tax people or the NM ag.. who wants to send an unofficial message to the membership of the ssa that the **** is about to hit the fan.
5. he may be a pilot who is seeking a berth on the national team who does not want to risk offending the powers that be.
6. He may have a commercial interest in soaring and does not want to risk his business base, but has personal feelings.
7. He may be a director of the ssa who is seeking to go against the flow and to affect change, but is running into the establishment.
8. he may just be a member who is genuinely ****ed off at the way things have gone and who has reached the point of speaking out and "tipping at windmills" a la Don Quixote.


THE TEN TOP REASONS WHY 5BG WILL NOT SIGN HIS NAME TO HIS POSTS

10. HE IS REALLY JUDGE JUDY

9. HE IS A US REPRESENTATIVE, RECENTLY IN THE NEWS, AND WOULD LIKE TO
WORK WITH THE YOUTH IN SOARING

8. HE IS REALLY A PAGE WHO WORKED FOR THE ABOVE REFERRED TO
CONGRESSMAN.

7. HE IS DOUG JACOBS

6. HE OWNS THREE MAJOR SORING OPERATIONS IN THE US AND DOES NOT WANT
TO JEOPARDIZE THE MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS HE IS MAKING

5. HE IS REALLY A SHE - NAMELY DIANNE BLACK-NIXON

4. HE IS DENNIS WRIGHT

3. HE IS A RAG HEAD FROM THE MIDDLE EAST TRYING TO CAUSE TROUBLE IN
THE US

2. HE IS CHAIRMAN OF THE SSA FOUNDATION AND WANTS TO KEEP THAT MONEY
FOR HIMSELF

AND THE NUMBER ONE REASON WHY 5BG WILL NOT SIGN HIS POSTS IS:

1. HE IS JUST AN OBNOXIOUS, LOUD MOUTHED MEMBER OFTHE SSA WHO REALLY
IS A CHICKEN**** GUTLESS
COWARD WHO DOES NOT HAVE THE CONVICTION NOR COURAGE NOR BALLS TO
SIGN HIS POSTS!!

Warmest Regards to All,

Frank Reid

Dear 5-BG,
Absent identifying youself, your credibility is absent as well.
Though you raise some possibly valid points, your audience grows smaller by the hour.
Thus, as so well said by another poster on this thread,
POOF!!!!
Signed, for all the world to see, Pete Reinhart, Life Member
"5-BG" 5-bghatesspam @ fake.com wrote in message news Reading this report left me with some questions and prompts some editorial comments;
questions:
1. it seems that perhaps the financial misrepresentations could have been comprised of two distinct parts. Actual misappropriation of ssa funds by someone and covered up. AND perhaps spending beyond society means. Misappropriation is covered, hopefully , by insurance. Overspending is not. The question I have is did the SSA overspend its resources while at the same time get ripped off? If it is a 100% rip off of funds, then the insurance company should make good our loss. If there is a significant element of simple fiscal irresponsibility, then the ssa is out of luck in terms of recovering the shortfall in cash.

2. No mention was made of any discussion of possible conflict of interest among the board. No mention was made of any discussion by the board of their potential personal liability, either as ssa board or as foundation board members. Was this topic discussed? I find it difficult to believe that no one brought it up.

3. No mention was made of services to be curtailed or the terms of the loan from the foundation. If they don't have a plan by now, we are in trouble big time. What services will be curtailed?

comments:
1. It seems as if Chip is back in the fold after going public with his concerns re board actions. We have yet to be told of his complaints to the board and what actions they took to satisfy his concerns. This seems to me to be of legitimate concern to members.

2. The resignation of the ED basically leaves SSA WITHOUT an effective lobbyist for our interests. Since this is one of the main reasons for the existence of the society, I would assume that some sort of outsourcing of this function will be undertaken.It would be nice for the membership to be informed of how this function is to be handled if at all during the repayment period and the restructuring period.

3. The issue of the magazine was not addressed. This seems to me to be an immediate item ripe for drastic cutback. It is the single largest annual expense. Was the option of going all electronic discussed??? A 12 month halt in print publication would probably save almost enough to pay the loan back.

4. The restructuring task force has a large job in front of it if it is to succeed. I would hope that a timeline is being formulated and that the task is structured such that the members are presented with a series of choices along the way. So far, the excom and rest of the board have not presented members with any choices. They have taken the position that they were elected to run the show and that job extends to the task of total restructuring.
I disagree. They were elected to do a job and they failed miserably at the task of oversight. They were elected to oversee an smooth running organization and they did not.
They were NOT elected to radically restructure the organization. This is NOT business as usual. I have no confidence in them at this point. The chair wrote in her second note to members "Once the Society emerges from this awful situation, our intent is to tender resignations in respect of our leadership positions, hoping that new, qualified individuals will assume these roles."

I would suggest that the current excom borrow the immediately needed funds from the BANK rather than digging their personal hole any deeper and then follow through on this promise to resign immediately. The immediate fires will have been put out and fresh faces should be enlisted to run the show during this next year.
5bg

Clipped from the nameless wonder....

I am a simple member and have been to many years. one
of the faceless many who feel abused and ignored by
the high profile 'big names' who ran this organization
for their personal aggrandizement and ultimately into
the ground.

Perhaps you should google on SLAPP SUIT for a reasonable
explanation of the desire to remain faceless.


I did just that.....
SLAPP suit

A Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, in
which a corporation or developer sues an organization
in an attempt to scare it into dropping protests against
a corporate initiative. SLAPP suits typically involve
the environment--for example, local residents who are
petitioning to change zoning laws to prevent a real
estate development might be sued in a SLAPP suit for
interference with the developer's business interests.
Many states have 'anti-SLAPP suit' statutes that protect
citizens' rights to free speech and to petition the
government.

So some guys in suits and dark glasses are going to
come knocking at your door if you come up with the
courage to use your name to your rants? I am sure
the 'big names' are searching for your IP address as
we speak

How are your anonymous dribbles contributing to a solution?