Do you remember...

[Mel Turcanik]

I'm deeply dissapointed

Guys - here's an example of the evidence you've asked for:

Whoever runs the MAG website has been remiss in removing the MAG's proxy solicitation - this link to the MAG proxy is still active, as of 6:25MST today, August 24 - over two weeks after the "bury the hatchet" agreement was signed: http://memberactiongroup.com/id2.html

I’ve spoken to Malcolm Tibbetts and Mel Turcanik about this kind of thing adding fuel to the fires of suspicion and mistrust, going back two weeks now, yet it remains on the site. I personally don’t think that there’s anything to it – probably just a little laziness on the part of the MAG website guy. But, having this on the MAG site is not a good thing.

I'm deeply disappointed in this baiting exercise. I spent hours talking with you regarding this and other issues and felt we had some rapport. The following is a copy of our email exchange after one of our conversations. After our website was changed on 8/14, to do some hacking and 10 days later claim it wasn't changed simply demonstrates to me a lack of integrity on your part. You could have at least talked with me again if you had further concerns. Notice your acknowledgment of the change on the 14th.

From: Ed Davidson <edd777@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: MAG home page
Date: August 14, 2010 10:52:45 AM CDT
To: Mel Turcanik <turcanik@yahoo.com>
Mel,

That's outstanding - thanks for the follow through.

Best regards,
Ed Davidson
AAW webmaster

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Mel Turcanik" <turcanik@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 10:04 PM
To: "Ed Davidson" <edd777@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: MAG home page

Ed,

Correct in all respects. I'll get on this right away. Hate to admit it, but I never went to that page. I thought we were talking about the home page. I hope we can get that changed tomorrow, though I can't promise anything. It seems to take forever to get stuff changed.

We definitely don't want that still up there.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
Mel



On Aug 13, 2010, at 8:49 PM, Ed Davidson wrote:

Mel,

The "Goals" page as an example, is completely unchanged and still clearly says that your intent is to call a special meeting and overthrow the board: http://memberactiongroup.com/id34.html - hard to take that out of context. And that's the issue. I'm afraid that if this kind of wording stays up on the MAG site, that the board supporters will get paranoid, assume the worse and re-start their proxy campaign.

Best regards,
Ed Davidson
AAW webmaster

The pages were changed on the 14th and have remained so since then. We are rejecting all proxies, and since I am the proxy holder, I should know.
Mel Turcanik #7743

 

[Dick Wilson]

I just looked

at the MAG website. The home page had this:

At the request of Mary Lacer, who fully realizes the damage that would be done with a full blown “proxy battle,” the MAG has discontinued its proxy efforts. We are confident, based upon the level of membership support that we have received, that we could have prevailed in such an effort. But, we also recognize the long-term damage that would have affected our association, regardless of which side collected more proxies.

On the "Goals" page the only thing it says is that the goal of mounting a proxy campaign HAS BEEN DROPPED and that the goal now is to be a watchdog.

What the heck is your problem. First of all maybe all those that are so darned concerned should go the MAG site and read it themselves. If the board is in a paranoid fit maybe they should call Mel or Malcom. Second, who is stirring the pot now!!!!!

 

[George Guadiane]

Royce,
For the record, are you saying that all the leaders of mag will not retaliate in anyway, they will not try to remove by force any of the existing directors and they will not try to discredit myself and other members of the bylaws committee?

Also, are you saying that the leaders of mag will talk to those on mag's website and ask them to refrain from the type of dialogue that is evident on that site and to abide to everything in the above paragraph?

OK, 41 posts later and I stayed out - (YES, I was on unpaid "leave" for a couple of weeks, but still) till now:
Ron, I would have thought you might have apologized by now instead of trying to support and/or defend your original post.

Your question above begs for this question as a response:
"Are you saying that (any) all leaders of MAG will retaliate in some way, at some time, that they WILL try to force any existing directors, and that they WILL try to discredit you and other members of the ByLaws committee... And that they will do it as representatives OF MAG? What proof, if any do you have?

REALLY? On the second question? It's not enough to have civility and order on the AAW site (for which, even having me gone has not really helped), people who still have "issues" should not be allowed to voice them in other places (unless you approve)?

Your original post used off site information (out of context, in my opinion) to draw a conclusion that you could use to attack MAG (in an ever so unattacking way), just one more time. This quoted post proclaims POTENTIAL injury by MAG members to you and others. Seems like conjecture AND speculation to me.

 

[Ron Sardo]

Ron, you must be insecure. Perhaps you should be, I really don't know. What the future holds, I equally don't know. Given past history, one must wonder about that. Conduct yourself as a gentleman and refrain from indulging in suspicious speculation which can only keep the pot boiling. What MAG may do in the future depends upon future developments, I suspose--wait and see, then comment if you must.

Interesting

 

[Al Stramiello]

Interesting

Ron's playing scrabble.

I just tallied up his points . . . 12 (the "G" is worth 2 points)

 

[Ed Davidson]

Mel,

Perhaps you did not fully read the last sentence of my original post:

I personally don’t think that there’s anything to it – probably just a little laziness on the part of the MAG website guy. But, having this on the MAG site is not a good thing.

This is not a baiting exercise – it is a failure to follow through thing. I can see how you’d be upset with yourself for not doing a proactive site review and take-down of old/obsolete info, or with the MAG’s website guy for not policing the old and obsolete stuff off the site either. But why would you be upset with me? Did you expect me to call you a third time to follow up on this? Or to post another email to ask you to do again what has already been asked? If yes, ok - I accept your criticism for not having gone out of my way to ask again that the MAG website reflect the Mary Lacer/BoD agreement. I certainly did not do that, and for that, I apologize.

 

[Al Stramiello]

Ed . . . shake hands . . . and let it go. It's over and done with.

 

[Ron Sardo]

Ron's playing scrabble.

I just tallied up his points . . . 12 (the "G" is worth 2 points)

I placed it on a double word score so it worth 24.

 

[Mel Turcanik]

Mel,

Perhaps you did not fully read the last sentence of my original post:

This is not a baiting exercise – it is a failure to follow through thing. I can see how you’d be upset with yourself for not doing a proactive site review and take-down of old/obsolete info, or with the MAG’s website guy for not policing the old and obsolete stuff off the site either. But why would you be upset with me? Did you expect me to call you a third time to follow up on this? Or to post another email to ask you to do again what has already been asked? If yes, ok - I accept your criticism for not having gone out of my way to ask again that the MAG website reflect the Mary Lacer/BoD agreement. I certainly did not do that, and for that, I apologize.

I have checked the website several times and have never since the 14th seen the information that you say is there. If it's not there, how can I follow up on removing it? It's not there now, wasn't there on the 24th. I'm upset with you because you say something is there that isn't. And, you acknowledged on the 14th that it wasn't there. After that acknowledgment, I would expect you to contact me if there were further concerns and I accept your apology.

Our webmaster is a volunteer who does this as a favor after work, after family, as it should be. We are grateful to him for his service. Sometimes there are delays, but lazy, I don't think so. Malcolm Tibbetts already had written the changes that we discussed prior to my asking for them. There was simply a delay in getting everything posted.

So, where exactly are you going to get these pages? There isn't even a proxy page on the site!

Mel Turcanik #7743

 

[hockenbery]

tolerance??

Mel,
I'm all in favor a extending tolerance toward all those working for AAW
whether they be
Board Members
Bylaws committee members
Member action group participants
or any other AAW volunteers.

I won't always agree with what any of them do.

I hope I can always respect them as individuals even when they dance around the truth to make their respective points or blow a meaningless issue all out of proportion.

It is quite easy to delete the proxy page. Once you have FTP access it is Just like deleting a file on your computer. that said finding the 3 minutes to do it is not always easy. I've been there with a task that was so easy but never got around to it.

Tolerance for all of our fellow members is the way to go.

-Al

 

[Ed Davidson]

I have checked the website several times and have never since the 14th seen the information that you say is there. If it's not there, how can I follow up on removing it? It's not there now, wasn't there on the 24th. I'm upset with you because you say something is there that isn't. And, you acknowledged on the 14th that it wasn't there. After that acknowledgment, I would expect you to contact me if there were further concerns and I accept your apology.

Our webmaster is a volunteer who does this as a favor after work, after family, as it should be. We are grateful to him for his service. Sometimes there are delays, but lazy, I don't think so. Malcolm Tibbetts already had written the changes that we discussed prior to my asking for them. There was simply a delay in getting everything posted.

So, where exactly are you going to get these pages? There isn't even a proxy page on the site!

Mel Turcanik #7743

Mel,

If you had a brief talk with the MAG website volunteer, you'd know a little more, and not feel so compelled to blast away here on this forum. He apparently removed the MAG’s proxy solicitation page and link off the MAG’s Guest Book page shortly after it was brought to his attention via this thread, on 8/24. You could also read posts number 22, 23 and 25 from this same thread for a little more insight.

 

[Mel Turcanik]

Failure to communicate

Mel,

If you had a brief talk with the MAG website volunteer, you'd know a little more, and not feel so compelled to blast away here on this forum. He apparently removed the MAG’s proxy solicitation page and link off the MAG’s Guest Book page shortly after it was brought to his attention via this thread, on 8/24. You could also read posts number 22, 23 and 25 from this same thread for a little more insight.

Thank you Ed for that explanation. I apologize for my previous rant regarding your integrity. I once again thank you for keeping us on our toes.

I have spent very little time on the guest book of the MAG site and didn't even know there were links from there, no excuse, just explaining.

Once again I'm sorry, my skin has gotten a bit thin lately. I have not lived up to my own standards. I should have called you before posting the first time.

Mel Turcanik #7743

 

[Al Stramiello]

Good for you, Ed. You got him to say, "Uncle".

You really could have done that in a kinder, gentler fashion.

 

[Mel Turcanik]

It's OK

It's OK Al, I earned it.

Mel Turcanik #7743

 

[Ed Davidson]

Mel - I am as guilty as anyone of jumping to conclusions and basing opinion on impressions, biases and predispositions. It’s really difficult to avoid getting caught up in this turmoil. Human nature I guess. In any event, I pledge to you today that I will do my best to keep an open mind, not go off half cocked or let emotion drive anything I say to another person.

 

[Al Stramiello]

Mel - I am as guilty as anyone of jumping to conclusions and basing opinion on impressions, biases and predispositions. It’s really difficult to avoid getting caught up in this turmoil. Human nature I guess. In any event, I pledge to you today that I will do my best to keep an open mind, not go off half cocked or let emotion drive anything I say to another person.

Thank you for doing that Ed.

 

[Mel Turcanik]

I will take your pledge

Mel - I am as guilty as anyone of jumping to conclusions and basing opinion on impressions, biases and predispositions. It’s really difficult to avoid getting caught up in this turmoil. Human nature I guess. In any event, I pledge to you today that I will do my best to keep an open mind, not go off half cocked or let emotion drive anything I say to another person.

I will take your pledge as well. If it takes a while for me to respond, it's because that last thing can take a while.

Being human can lead us down a destructive path, but it also enables us to what we are doing here. It's always our choice. I'm glad we can recognize that choice.

Thanks again for your openness,
Mel Turcanik #7743

 

[plamb]

Civil is good

It is time we are all civil and bury the conspiracy theories and all work for improving the field we love.
Peter
2534

 

[Garmar]

Mel - I am as guilty as anyone of jumping to conclusions and basing opinion on impressions, biases and predispositions. It’s really difficult to avoid getting caught up in this turmoil. Human nature I guess. In any event, I pledge to you today that I will do my best to keep an open mind, not go off half cocked or let emotion drive anything I say to another person.

I'll be watching you Ed...😀