WBCCI Board Lawsuit

[wheel interested]

yes there's more not sure I can disclose it.

I think I can, just want to check before hand.

Also the interpretation of that clause is not apparent as to what it means

more on that....

But wait there's more!!

Originally Posted by LI Pets

What makes you think that didn't occur by Defend Wally, the rants you read here are silent about that, why?

Every contributor and those on DW mail list were emailed about 200 went out by Howie, last week.

He had one reply.

But wait there's more!! Any way you slice dice or chop it...well you get the point...
__________________________________________________ _
Mr. Curley,
Sounds like the Metro NY Unit sold Leo in exchance for a seat at the table with the good old boys. No sweat by me as I'll not be renewing my membership...doesn't look good guys. Hopefully this is going in the right direction and not being driven by egos with the same BS as before.
__________________________________________________ ___
Who the heck is the president of NY unit and what does that have to do with Defend Wally? Where has she been prior to her letter?
I think it is scandelous that you let a unit take over the individuals lawsuit and handled it yourselves after the money was raised for a lawyer to do it.
Again it isn't winning or losing but how you play the game and the premise was to reinstate Leo and have the lawyer do the talking that was what the MONEY was contributed for even before you were asking for funds... You two, Bob and Howie should be ashamed. Except for a refund remove me from this e-mail list. Shame on you.
________________________________________________
HowieE,
I have today put a stop payment on my check for $200.
I no longer trust you, Mr Novak or any of the other supporters of DW.
You all should be ashamed of yourselves.
__________________________________________________ _____
Thanks for the info, but let me get right to the point. While this new tack might provide some benefits towards reforming the club as it now operates,
my primary impetus for donating $100 to the law suit effort was to re-instate Leo G. This part of the effort has mysteriously disappeared from
the action.
I would like to officially request the return of my $100 donation, as I am much less than satisfied with this resolution and Leo and his wife is still' out'
and the powers that perpetrated his 'dismissal' are still 'in'.
Thanks!
__________________________________________________ __________

But wait there's more!!

Better have Howie check his inbox I have a feeling more are piling up there...

And now you ask us to wait for more, more, more. Well I think I have had enough. It's pretty clear that there have been more than enough liberties taken with the truth around here.

[mistral blue]

Originally Posted by LI Pets

What makes you think that didn't occur by Defend Wally, the rants you read here are silent about that, why?

Every contributor and those on DW mail list were emailed about 200 went out by Howie, last week.

He had one reply.

The following is what Howie sent Wednesday, August 25, 2010, 3:22 p.m., EST. It was sent after Michele Curley posted her announcement here and includes Michele's announcement that, "[d]uring the course of preparing the law suit, Defend Wally/Metro NY was contacted by WBCCI. Discussions began, and eventually centered on withholding the lawsuit in exchange for appointing a representative from Defend Wally/Metro NY to sit on a newly created “By-Laws Revision Committee.”

Essentially Howie sent out Michele's announcement!

Hello to all Defendwally Donators

We have all been waiting a prolonged time for any official announcement relating to the Defendwally Lawsuit. That delay was necessary as we evaluated an option other than a lawsuit. After reviewing all options and with advice of our lawyer we have decided to place the suit on hold and to allow a less confrontational approach is considered.

I apologize for the delay in advising you but I am on the road and only have limited access to the net

While I do not expect any significant announcements for the duration of my vacation there is an on going discussion on Airfourms

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f286...tml#post886698

Again I am going to ask all to give us a bit more time to determine how this will unfold. I am quite sure it will not parallel the 2020 committee as a dog and pony show with no intent of action if for no other reason because of who initiated it


HowieE


Defend Wally/Metro NY withholds lawsuit against WBCCI, seeks amicable resolution

Numerous Defend Wally and Metro NY members are dissatisfied with the WBCCI status quo, and feel that positive change in the club is both urgent and necessary if it is to survive. These same members believe that their voices are not being heard, and that positive change is being blocked by antiquated, cumbersome club procedures and disinterested past officers. To address this situation, Defend Wally created a legal fund and Metro NY later came on board as an additional plaintiff. Legal counsel was retained to file suit against WBCCI and institute change.

During the course of preparing the law suit, Defend Wally/Metro NY was contacted by WBCCI. Discussions began, and eventually centered on withholding the lawsuit in exchange for appointing a representative from Defend Wally/Metro NY to sit on a newly created “By-Laws Revision Committee.” This five member Committee would be tasked with consolidating and incorporating changes to the club’s Bylaws and Constitution. Encouraged by this turn of events and intent upon having a seat at the table to institute positive change within WBCCI, Defend Wally/Metro NY has decided to withhold filing suit in the hope that changes in the club can be achieved amicably through this new Committee.

Unfortunately, Mr. Leo G has declined such compromise. He has moved on in another direction and is in no way involved with Defend Wally/Metro NY’s desire to achieve change through dialogue, negotiation, and compromise.

Defend Wally/Metro NY has chosen a representative to the Committee, and he has been duly appointed by WBCCI. It is the desire of this individual to represent any members who are dissatisfied with the club, and to bridge the disharmony between our groups. This representative will be a conduit for these dissatisfied members, and seek to institute constructive change and cooperation from within the club. We believe it is critical to the club’s creditability that the concerns of these members be properly addressed, and that the parties continue to operate in good faith, toward the resolution of any outstanding issues.

To this end we have directed counsel to suspend legal action while the By-Laws Revision Committee meets to generate its recommendations, and the WBCCI act upon same.

Sincerely,
Michele M. Curley
President Metro NY Unit
and on behalf of Defend Wally

[Ed Emerick]

Originally Posted by wheel interested

Grand Master are the dates included? Are those legal expenses because of the member driven lawsuit or is it for cease and desist letters and legal fees paid to uphold Leo's expulsion as he tried to present his disallowed defense? I just wanted to be certain we were comparing the same dates and expenses.

Bob we need some concrete numbers and reports and contact numbers here to show and verify our work with the lawsuit. Without facts the situation is becoming confused as 2Air has pointed out.

The detail on those expenses are available to a dues paying WBCCI member, all you have to do is ask JC. That will give you who was paid when.

[Lily&Me]

Originally Posted by 2airishuman

it's a simple concept that continues to elude your grasp...



it's really not about positive or negative reasons,

it's ALL about how/when and IF this happened as reported SO FAR.

once again THIS notion (that THEY did anything as reported here)...

assumes the story/events as posted here are an accurate reporting...

unless you personally have confirmed HOW this current position was reached ((with the ibt leaders))...

the POINT is still...

first hand knowledge/confirmation of what happened, how, by who and so on is lacking IN THIS THREAD.

VERIFY what did/not happen in the genesis of this committee and its members...

and YES folks who donated should do this,

rather than trusting to or ACCEPTING the events as reported here.

REread these questions...



then find ANY sources in this thread (or anywhere else) that...

1. directly answer the questions
2. come from ANYone other that the poster in post #791 or ONE DW member.

independent confirmation of the story/events/process/proceedings is NEEDED.

don't rationalize based on a story version that MAY not be complete or accurate.



you do, as does ANY dues pay'n wb' member...

have you contacted ANY ibt leader by mail/phone/online or by way of your unit officers?

the top brass does reply to the underlings, occasionally...

cheers
2air'

Your rather snide sarcasm aside, 2air, this is not beyond my grasp, thank you. My expectations here and view of this are not the same as yours and some of the other posters.

The previous post from last night, with the email from Howie, might answer some of the questions as to what happened, why and how. This info was rather late in coming here, IMO, but I am glad to see this was sent out to contributors before it all became public information.

Maggie

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by wheel interested

__________________________________________________ __
Who the heck is the president of NY unit and what does that have to do with Defend Wally? Where has she been prior to her letter?
I think it is scandalous that you let a unit take over the individuals lawsuit and handled it yourselves after the money was raised for a lawyer to do it.
Again it isn't winning or losing but how you play the game and the premise was to reinstate Leo and have the lawyer do the talking that was what the MONEY was contributed for even before you were asking for funds... You two, Bob and Howie should be ashamed. Except for a refund remove me from this e-mail list. Shame on you.
________________________________________________

I have today put a stop payment on my check for $200.
I no longer trust you, Mr Novak or any of the other supporters of DW.
You all should be ashamed of yourselves.
__________________________________________________ _____
Thanks for the info, but let me get right to the point. While this new tack might provide some benefits towards reforming the club as it now operates,my primary impetus for donating $100 to the law suit effort was to re-instate Leo G. This part of the effort has mysteriously disappeared from
the action.
I would like to officially request the return of my $100 donation, as I am much less than satisfied with this resolution and Leo and his wife is still' out'
and the powers that perpetrated his 'dismissal' are still 'in'.
Thanks!
__________________________________________________ __________

Spoke with Howie on Friday there was one when checked then, then you, Don and Lew sent the above.

No one else emailed as of this posting.

But you failed to report when you improperly entered Howie's email account is all the replies in support.

Bottom line, the same tiny group keep posting mis statements of fact.

You're all entitled to your opinion but civility aside, and notwithstanding several folk’s emotional state and misstatement of the facts, their approach is/was unwarranted and is counterproductive in any situation where you are attempting to resolve a matter and get to the facts.

I’m not going to try and answer your questions only to be abused and called names, the mods can’t catch all of the junk.

If questions are asked in a civil manor I’ll do my best but will not respond otherwise.


Last point, there is a bylaws thread for questions relating to the committee and it the only place that people have EVER had to suggest what changes in the club they wish to see thru changes in the bylaws.
So many have been complaining about the way things are done in the past with the club ranting does nothing to change the club.

Have you read the rules recently
Be Courteous! ……. what sets us apart from the other boards - we are friendlier, more civil, more insightful, more mature and more fun.

• Do not engage in personal attacks.Excessive sarcasm, extreme belligerence, insults, extreme anger.
• Do not post unsubstantiated gossip, libelous remarks or directly misleading information.
• Harassment, stalking or predatory behavior will not be tolerated.

.

[mistral blue]

Originally Posted by doug&maggie

The previous post from last night, with the email from Howie, might answer some of the questions as to what happened, why and how. This info was rather late in coming here, IMO, but I am glad to see this was sent out to contributors before it all became public information.

It wasn't.
Howie's e-mail came after Michele's announcement here.
Howie copied Michele's announcement and also included a link to this thread in his e-mail.

[Lily&Me]

Originally Posted by mistral blue

It wasn't.
Howie's e-mail came after Michele's announcement here.
Howie copied Michele's announcement and also included a link to this thread in his e-mail.

Okay, thanks for that clarification. I will then say again, shame on them for not contacting their supporters first. Outrage and feelings of betrayal were eminently predictable.


Maggie

[2airishuman]

Originally Posted by LI Pets

...Last point, there is a bylaws thread for questions relating to the committee and it the only place that people have EVER had to suggest what changes in the club they wish to see thru changes in the bylaws...

actually there are SEVERAL older threads with repositories of bylaw suggestions, revisions and ideas...

that were sincerely offered in an effort to improve the club...

seriously, ASKING to have the ideas REposted in a new thread does nothing but delay action.

relatively new wb members (3-5 years in) often somehow ENDUP serving on overwhelmingly complex NEW committees...

with NO REAL POWER to implement change.

this gives the appearance of a PREZ doing something during his/her term...

while wearing OUT the younger/inexperienced clubbers...

and the SAME STUFF happens all over again with the NEXT prez...
___________

Originally Posted by LI Pets

...So many have been complaining about the way things are done in the past with the club ranting does nothing to change the club...

ranting seems to be the word of the weak, but the simple history IS...

COMMITTEES have none nothing to "change the club" in any substantial way.
____________

as for the new committee...

in one version of it's purpose, it is suggested that...

'changes will be CONSOLIDATED and INCORPORATED into the bylaws'....

while ANOTHER version of the officially stated goals reads...

'strive to detect and eliminate any inconsistency or any ambiguities'...

the latter could be translated into a committee of PROOFREADERS...
__________

the single most important CHANGE in the bylaws is the PRIME DIRECTIVE...

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f290...tml#post770583

once the financials are structured to REQUIRE SPENDING all DUES MONEY at the unit level...

everything ELSE will fall into place (and be REwritten) to support that goal.
____________

finding inconsistencies, ambiguities and consolidating the IDEAS for by laws revision...

does not GET ANYTHING MEANINGFUL into the club charter/bylaws...

the required PROCESS to INSERT real changes into the bylaws will ultimately BLOCK revision.

how much will ULTIMATELY make it to a member VOTE?

ZIP/zero.

so once again months will pass with a new set of gyrations...

by a committee (this is the slight of hand distraction)

while the club continues to circle the drain.

and any REAL changes will happen in some other venue...

while most are WATCHING for the committee to post updates.
__________

at least there is ONE POINT of agreement here...

Originally Posted by LI Pets

...Bottom line, the same tiny group keep posting mis statements of fact...

now back 2 that point WHO can verify the real chain of events from june2now?

anyone?


cheers
2air'

[Air Apparent]

Originally Posted by Boondocker

STORM THE CASTLE!!!!!!!!*

SOUND THE BUGLE; the troops are in disarray !!!!

[mistral blue]

Hi Don

The goals of Defend Wally have been met.

Perhaps the list of objectives needs to be bifurcated
One. to seek the reinstatement of Leo
Two. changes to the bylaws.
Both of which Metro NY fully supported, putting their money into the fund as well as a number of supporters.

Metro NY collected all donations not DW because it is not a legal.

After the law firm was retained they reviewed the case law finding certain objectives (claims) were not actionable. The balances of the claims were but if litigated successfully would in the best case scenario the Court could Order the club to amend their bylaws.

Ok so we now win the case the club amends the bylaws without any input from plaintiffs.

This process could have dragged on for 2-5+ years, during that time the fund would have been depleted; we would need to raise more money. Not an easy task

So some time in 2012-2015 change would occur? Not the change the committee expects.

Leo would have been reinstated the lawyer was confident of that, not sure if that would occur sooner than 2012-2015 with the rest of the case or thru other legal procedures faster, never finished that scenario.

There was a delay by Leo (about 10 weeks) in getting the needed docs to the lawyer in time to file the suit before the International rally as planned.

If it was filed before the international this outcome would not have happened
When one door closes another opens.

An offer was made Lawyers talked on both sides.

DW/Metro’s attorney felt that a couple of seats on the committee was a better outcome than could ever be achieved in Court in maybe five (2015) years at a cost of $$$$$$.

However, Leo was not included, the lawyer felt confident he could obtain his reinstatement with some sort of probation period but full member rights.

Leo reluctantly agreed the night before the lawyer was going to contact the clubs lawyer.

Early the next morning Leo emailed the lawyer and instructed him not to call.

Leo clearly declined reinstatement.

Defend Wally/Metro NY was asked to nominate two members to the committee for one seat, we sent three.

The DW contributors and Metro obtained a favorable resolution.

We welcome your suggestions as to what or how the bylaws can be changed


DW

[mistral blue]

Hi DW,

Do you have a real name?
Would it be possible to get some straight answers from you?
It's like pulling teeth from a chicken on the lawsuit thread.
FWIW, I have a feeling DW and MetroNY are headed for some serious trouble.

As Bob (LI Pets) said in the lawsuit thread, "DW had a fiduciary duty to its contributors".

That's very true.

I'm sure you'll agree with me that a fiduciary duty was also owed to the members of MetroNY.

But as Bob indicated in the same lawsuit thread, "MetroNY had the largest vested interest in this."
If I remember correctly, DW started the ball rolling and MetroNY joined in later, correct?

At what point did MetroNY swallow DW?

Unfortunately, this is now a clear conflict of interest case.
Acting on behalf of MetroNY at the expense of DW is a classic example of a conflict of interest case resulting in a breach of a fiduciary duty to the contributors of DW.
That's not good!!!
___________________

You indicate that there was in fact a negotiation:
"An offer was made. Lawyers talked on both sides."

Who made the offer?
What was the offer?
Were all of the plaintiffs/contributors notified there was an offer on the table?

You also said, "Defend Wally/Metro NY was asked to nominate two members to the committee for one seat, we sent three."

Which members were sent?
Were all of the plaintiffs/contributors consulted, contacted or otherwise kept in the loop on this?

Please help me out, what exactly are the terms of the negotiated settlement you claim to have obtained?

Thank you,
Don

[Gene]

Originally Posted by doug&maggie

They chose Bob for a reason, not necessarily for one we would consider positive.


It occurred to me that dissemination of the information being demanded may be an attorney-client privilege problem.

First last, last first: Attorney/client privilege may be a problem. Only the client can waive the privilege. Some question in my mind just who the client(s) is(are). Bob, Defend Wally Committee (is it an amorphous group, or more formal?), Metro NY, all or some of the above? The parties that were involved in the settlement/compromise/deal may have agreed on silence about the process.

As for why one group choses a member of the opposition for a committee—just as a general comment on human nature, doesn't everyone want to hang with people just like themselves?

Who did the committee choosing is another question—it would have to be the product of some sort of negotiation, but no doubt an arcane negotiation. For the negotiators to disclose the process and the stance of all parties might well blow up the deal. Surely there are people outside the negotiating group (and maybe inside) who would love to blow up the deal.

Confidentiality is sometimes the only way a deal can be made. But, those outside are always upset. Those inside will for various reasons want to blab something, and some may. When trust is minimal, and the insiders are attacked by the outsiders, blabbing pressure is high.

If I were the WBCCI leadership and were reading this thread, I would be fairly confident of ultimate victory and that only cosmetic changes have to be made. That belief may well be wrong, or cosmetic changes may keep the peasants with their pitchforks held off for the moment, but the insurrection will continue nonetheless. It begins to look like a morbid battle over who gets to keep Wally's corpse in their personal shrine.

The insurrectionistas should now be planning their next 20 or 30 moves for various scenarios—committee is real, committee isn't real, etc. Storming the castle has a divine simplicity to it, but will not be adequate.

Gene

[Boondocker]

Originally Posted by CrawfordGene

It begins to look like a morbid battle over who gets to keep Wally's corpse in their personal shrine.

....... Storming the castle has a divine simplicity to it, but will not be adequate.

Gene

Aww, but storming the castle is fun; all the senseless destruction and mayhem with no accountability. Oh well.

I have concluded that WBCCI really doesn't have a constitution for governance- its a suicide pact. A pact that people who are in a position to break it have no intention whatsoever of doing so.

It is really sad that a camping club could get so discombobulated by side considerations to the point that its very survival is doubtful. Goodwill, and goodwill alone can save the club, but goodwill it seems, just isn't to be found. Selah.

[2airishuman]

It occurred to me that dissemination of the information being demanded may be an attorney-client privilege problem...

Originally Posted by CrawfordGene

...The parties that were involved in the settlement/compromise/deal may have agreed on silence about the process.

and a fine explanation of a/c privilege...

but this train o'thought continues to be based on the assumption that...

negotiations, settlements and "agreements" were reached.

there is still no validation of WHAT actually happened.

it's doubtful ne1 posting here REPRESENTS either party as legal council.

obviously the legal teams might be restricted from clearing this up.

but does anyone HERE really think a binding agreement was drafted and signed?

or that this NONexistent document includes HUSH clauses for the defend/cry team OR wb' bobbleheads ??
_________

i doubt ANY formal agreement was reached,

in fact the very origin and definition of the A word makes this very UNlikely.
_________

the most recent email to m'blue from DW includes more details, but are they true?

and why would his Dear Wife be sending him email on this club nonsense?

_________

i DO favor tossing cows at the castle

and organizing a ministry of funny walks...

fresh ideas 2bsure.
_________

cheers
2air'

[Gene]

Originally Posted by 2airishuman

but does anyone HERE really think a binding agreement was drafted and signed?


i DO favor tossing cows at the castle

and organizing a ministry of funny walks...

There are many possible ways some sort of agreement was reached and memorialized (lawyer talk for written down). There could be letters or e-mails between lawyers with confirmation from various clients or quasiclients, or a simple letter signed by some or all, or even an oral agreement (which no doubt everyone would interpret differently). Something had to be agreed to in some form, or there would not be what is.

Moving on to more important things—

It is the Ministry of Silly Walks and I, for one, believe that it should be part of the WBCCI structure and if so, would make it more likely for me to join such an organization. Rodney could be the Minister in charge so he wouldn't storm the castle and could defend it against flying cows. But, didn't we learn that flinging a cow is not the right thing to do, but flinging a piano is?

Gotta go and return the parrot and pick up a spam egg spam sandwich.

Gene

[2airishuman]

no doubt silly walks is protected by someone and i don't want a CnD letter...

which is why funny walks could be used, mehbe.

i had planned to suggest the ministry of cane, crutch, stroller, wheelchair and quadwalker enabled gimpy walks...

but didn't want to appear to be ranting.

if a quasiclient has a something similar to an engine in their toe vehicle...

is it a quasimotoe ?

cheers
2air'

[HowieE]

Not to appear among the missing I just want to let you all know I am alive and well in Edisto Beach SC.

I have my grandkids with me and limited access to the net so I will not have time to absorb all of the wisdom that has been posted since I started my vacation.Will get into it after Labor Day. Those who want to rant can have a few more days to do so, not that it will have any effect on the outcome.

I will say Bob was not along in the decision that caused the current course of action. Several factors combined to warrant an attempt participate with this committee.

[wheel interested]

How to Cripple an Initiative
or Confessions of a Fallen Team


The Defend Wally Team was composed of 5 members; Leo, Tim, Carol (SW) Howie and Bob (Ted and Alice weren't available.) Who was leader, that's the million dollar question? Well Bob had a lawyer friend, he said, the rest is history.

What makes for good team work? Balance, communication, cross functioning individuals dedicated to a common goal with a clear focus on what they are working for. A good leader is someone who promotes high morale by playing a key role in creating an atmosphere in which all co-members feel valued and supported. This helps to prevent such problems as gossip, rumour-mongering and backbiting, which can be so detrimental to a team's functioning. Effective teamwork therefore depends on a good leader, the right balance of the right people and the channels of communication remaining open between them. The team or committee is established to have all its members work together for a common goal and not to work independently of each other.

In Bob's case however once a team member did not agree they were conveniently jettisoned into cyberspace stripped of authority and quickly became fodder for contempt. Perhaps his fellow co-members on the new by-law revision committee will be spared the boy who would be king routine since Bob may have arrived at the pinnacle of his political aspirations within the club. But, for a man that could single handedly diffuse a critical situation, disband a team, sabatoge a lawsuit, scatter supporters and scuttle an effort all in a series of swift motion, well that man is deserving of much more than a mere committee seat, don't you think? That man knows how to get what he wants and is surely going places. Or so it appears.

So who is left anonymously working behind the scenes writing and preparing new reports and e-mails to supporters while Gnome burns under the auspices Defend Wally? This from the latest writings to appear recently,

...Leo would have been reinstated the lawyer was confident of that, not sure if that would occur sooner than 2012-2015 with the rest of the case or thru other legal procedures faster, never finished that scenario...

Leo could have been reinstated in 5 years? Now that is shrewd negotiation (for the other side, that is) especially in light that his term of expulsion is for two years. Oh, if only we had been patient! (rolling eyes) There's your donation dollars hard at work...

Without a doubt, Bob deservingly is on the fast track for WBCCI MVP this year. The newly designated merit award has been only recently created to honor those with highest achievement in the fast growing field of Code of Ethics Gone Wild. Hey Congratulations Bob!

So without further adieu, (drum roll, please) for outstanding achievement in a leading role of reparation influence and infiltration, the winner.......... the ingratiated Bob N!



Now will somebody please pass the Raisinettes? I want to sit down and watch the show too. Did somebody say hurling cows at the castle? Wow this ought to be good. Oh I do hope they put in the part that shows where IBT picks Bob in exchange for withdrawing the lawsuit. Dinner and a show. That is what you paid for isn't it?

[Gene]

Originally Posted by HowieE

I will not have time to absorb all of the wisdom that has been posted since I started my vacation.

Howie, if you only read the wisdom, it will only take a few minutes.

Of course, the real job is to decide which is the wisdom and which is antiwisdom, quasiwisdom, and pseudowisdom, not to mention factoids: Factoid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gene

[mistral blue]

Originally Posted by HowieE

... so I will not have time to absorb all of the wisdom that has been posted since I started my vacation.Will get into it after Labor Day. Those who want to rant can have a few more days to do so, not that it will have any effect on the outcome.

The above quote is essentially the equivalent of telling everyone who contributed (in a really sarcastic way) that you're all stupid, we took over and did what we thought was best with your money without telling you, any commentary or questioning you have regarding the decisions we made on your behalf (without telling you) is nothing more than useless unwelcome ranting, and on top of all that I'm only allowing you "a few more days" to get it out of your systems before we get down to the business of moving forward with our agenda whether you like it or not.

Meanwhile, I'm going to enjoy my vacation.