Bylaws Committee

[Mark Mandell]

Ron,

A very reasonable approach that I would condone in these sensitive times. A much better approach than your committee member Mr Mandell was proposing the committee intended to take. Might be worth considering who is authorized to speak on behalf of the Bylaws commitee.

Brian Finney

So, Mr. Finney, do you think that simply asking Jerry about this is somehow not an investigation? I've no idea what pops into your mind with the word "investigation", but I'm certainly not responsible for it either. Come to think of it, weren't you the one who was demanding Jerry be brought before the Ethics Committee based merely on what was posted on this Board? I think your words were

"Get the Ethics Committee in, do it properly."

Given my experience working with him over the past month or so, I'm not nearly so quick to bring some formal complaint against Jerry over what Glen Key has to say about who said what. It could all have been an easily explained misunderstanding by either or both of them, and this whole thing can get put down to people being too quick on the trigger to interpret and publish incidents in the worst possible light without doing a little homework. That is, unfortunately, a prevalent human trait on which AAW members have no monopoly.

Have a nice day.

 

[glenkey]

I was able to speak with Jerry today, as we both agreed, both of us were in error. His connection wasn't working right, and I did jump the gun.
The only other thing I can do at this point is to say I am sorry.
Now as Jerry said to me, it's time to move forward.

 

[Garmar]

Not to quibble over nits, Garmar, yes you did miss them for #5 & 6 (and neither have been edited according to the usual notation). My post was indeed an attempt at humor - wasn't my best work though.

On that last sentence Owen, I agree.

 

[Ron Sardo]

I was able to speak with Jerry today, as we both agreed, both of us were in error. His connection wasn't working right, and I did jump the gun.
The only other thing I can do at this point is to say I am sorry.
Now as Jerry said to me, it's time to move forward.

No problem Glen, thanks for getting back to us.

No harm, no foul. If I was able to shake your hand right now I would offer mine.

 

[glenkey]

No problem Glen, thanks for getting back to us.

No harm, no foul. If I was able to shake your hand right now I would offer mine.

Ron, Thank You. Although I can't really say there was no harm or foul. The only thing I have is my word. If you can't depend on me to tell the truth about what I have posted/said, then what do I have. Not much, even for me to look at in the mirror.
I would gladly shake your hand sir.

 

[KurtB]

A man that stands up for his actions is always a man to shake hands with. Even if I may disagree with your politics, I would still shake your hand for your actions.

 

[glenkey]

Kurt I'll be in Waco this weekend and will be more than happy to introduce myself.
I was at the meeting when you did a demo for Tulsa, we didn't get to talk and I don't recall photographing your demo.
If you are at SWAT I'll find you.

 

[Brian Finney]

"Get the Ethics Committee in, do it properly."

Mark,

I don't make Ron Sardo's allowances for Attorneys - I expect them to be able to communicate effectively - that is what they are paid for in their professional life.

'Investigation' is not 'give the guy a call', but I understand and accept his public need as Chair to but that interpretation on it.

If you are going to quote me please do it in context, it helps people understand the intended meaning of the word 'properly' ie within the rules, context prevents misunderstanding.

Play by the rules, lead by example.
Because Director(s) not playing by the rules go AAW into this expensive mess.
Get the Ethics Committee in, do it properly.

 

[Mark Mandell]

Mark,

I don't make Ron Sardo's allowances for Attorneys - I expect them to be able to communicate effectively - that is what they are paid for in their professional life.

'Investigation' is not 'give the guy a call', but I understand and accept his public need as Chair to but that interpretation on it.

If you are going to quote me please do it in context, it helps people understand the intended meaning of the word 'properly' ie within the rules, context prevents misunderstanding.

"No, investigation is not part of the Bylaws Committee's role.
You need the Ethics Commitee.

Brian Finney"

I guess I must apologize. Do I have the "context" correct now, Brian, where, with your two posts you presumed to instruct the committee on how to handle the situation while also taking another hip-shot at the AAW board? Did I miss anything this time?

As I said, I'm not responsible for your personal interpretation of the word "investigation" or others' use of hyperbole. I won't parse words here or quote dictionaries. You're free to look up the word. In fact, I recommend Black's Law Dictionary.

Personally, I don't call the cops until I've got enough facts to establish a prima facie case that a crime's been committed in their jurisdiction.

 

[Ron Sardo]

Ron, Thank You. Although I can't really say there was no harm or foul. The only thing I have is my word. If you can't depend on me to tell the truth about what I have posted/said, then what do I have. Not much, even for me to look at in the mirror.
I would gladly shake your hand sir.

Look at it this way.

If you and I where sitting at a kitchen table, drinking a cup of coffee and having a slice of my wife's homemade cheese cake with cherry topping, this whole thing would have transpired differently.

When we post on forums, we miss each others facial expressions and body language and can easily misinterpret each others meanings.

For me, I'm always joking around trying to get people to laugh, that doesn't always come across to well in a post, even with emoticons. I've been told I sound to serious in my posts, which totally surprises me every time I hear that.

When you first posted this, Mark called me to investigate if I lost my noodle. I told him I had no idea what he was talking about and said, "I bet Jerry just had a problem logging in".

If we talked about this face to face, this whole conversation would have been over in less than 30 seconds.

So again I say, No harm, no foul. If I was able to shake your hand right now I would offer mine.

 

[Stuart Johnson]

I agree this sounds like a giant case of not communicating. The no harm no foul isn't 100% true. I was called a muckraker and an threatened with being banned because of my negative attitude and not sending a private message to the moderator when I requested all but the original an bylaw co-chairman's posting be deleted. An accusation was made and a response posted. That should have been the end of it until the issue was resolved. I did further respond when questioned.

 

[George Guadiane]

If you and I where sitting at a kitchen table, drinking a cup of coffee and having a slice of my wife's homemade cheese cake with cherry topping, this whole thing would have transpired differently.

That sounds like an invitation! You never invited ME for your wife's cheesecake

 

[Mark Mandell]

That sounds like an invitation! You never invited ME for your wife's cheesecake

Might be concerned you'd start asking what he meant by "cheese" and "cake".

ps welcome back

 

[Ron Sardo]

That sounds like an invitation! You never invited ME for your wife's cheesecake

Don't you remember not to long ago you where looking for a big piece of walnut and I told you to stop by!

Not only did you miss out on that walnut, but my wife baked a blueberry cake that day.

 

[George Guadiane]

Might be concerned you'd start asking what he meant by "cheese" and "cake".

ps welcome back

Did I DO something to you???

I'm trying to make friends (and get a portion of tasty home made desert here)...

I use the word "portion" in an attempt to limit the misinterpretation you seem able and ready to conjecture.

 

[Mark Mandell]

Did I DO something to you???

I'm trying to make friends (and get a portion of tasty home made desert here)...

I use the word "portion" in an attempt to limit the misinterpretation you seem able and ready to conjecture.

I see. I'm afraid my humor didn't sit well this time, and for that I sincerely apologize.

To be sure, I'll be far more circumspect in the future. It appears that I will be better served to simply try not respond to your posts so as to avoid any further misunderstandings.

Again, Sorry.

 

[George Guadiane]

I see. I'm afraid my humor didn't sit well this time, and for that I sincerely apologize.

To be sure, I'll be far more circumspect in the future. It appears that I will be better served to simply try not respond to your posts so as to avoid any further misunderstandings.

Again, Sorry.

No problem, really, I just didn't want to be misunderstood here.
This particular set of circumstances: someone else's wife, cheese, cake, cheesecake and interpretation, all in the same thought process seemed a little dangerous - or maybe it's just me that goes there?

In any event, apology accepted - where's the desert table?

 

[Mark Mandell]

This particular set of circumstances: someone else's wife, cheese, cake, cheesecake and interpretation, all in the same thought process seemed a little dangerous - or maybe it's just me that goes there?

I'll not speak for anyone else, but if I'm understanding what you have now written, you most definitely went somewhere without me.

 

[Jamie Donaldson]

That eliminates you Mark...

..as a potential witness/ accessory to George's "activities."

 

[Mark Mandell]

..as a potential witness/ accessory to George's "activities."

Oh goodie! Since I'm not not going to have to testify, I can play Perry Mason, lawyer/investigator extraordinaire, . . "So, where was youz on da night in question . . . ?"

 

[George Guadiane]

Re: That eliminates you Mark...

..as a potential witness/ accessory to George's "activities."

Oh goodie! Since I'm not not going to have to testify, I can play Perry Mason, lawyer/investigator extraordinaire, . . "So, where was youz on da night in question . . . ?"

Order in the court!
All I did wuz axsk fuh sum cheezecake - Is dat really a crime youah honnah?

If it is, I wuzn't dere and I didn't did it, so help me.

And there was no night in question!!!

 

[Mark Mandell]

Since you've raised the question,

Trying to get cheesecake with an "axsk" would likely constitute assault with a deadly weapon in most jurisdictions outside of Brooklyn and Queens, NY.

ps: Even in broad daylight

 

[Jamie Donaldson]

Also applies in....

...most southern states as well!

 

[Buddy Riley]

I want

in on the desert buffet Ron. Cheesecake or some Key Lime pie, made by a wonderful cook, either in New York or Key West, will make me sit down with the devil himself, I won't share it with him, just let him sit there.

 

[glenkey]

O K, I like pie, even when made by someone else's wife.
Heck I like pie and it don't matter who made it.
As soon as SWAT is over I might be headed north for a slice of pie