I’d like to add my thanks, as well, for such a cogent, coherent and concise post.

The election will take its course. I am confident that those of us with the responsibility to do so will do our part to make sure the process is not subverted.

Personally, I am relieved that none of the people who have problems with 007’s candidacy chose to start a ruckus that evening. Less headache for Michele and me — but we would have dealt firmly with it.

In closing … today’s word rhymes with the name of the other queen of Henry’s to have lost her head …

Re: Huh?

Of course Flagg said that we didn’t a BOARD that took OFFICIAL action based on rumor. However I believe that letting people know that there will be no 11th our abuse of the process neither a BOARD nor is it, in any sense of makign a motion or other official move, an action at all.

Ummm… Yes, I am a lawyer, so my trade relies on the use of language…

Those two sentences (even ignoring the misspellings) make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Hence, I have no idea what you mean.

I don;t think anyone specifically pointed their fingers at you. Like I said, you have personal feelings, my points trying to be to you that personal feelings do not preempt someone’s right to due process under the bylaws. The rules don;t change because it was you who was affronted, no matter how much we wish them to.

As you know, Shana and my dealings with the person have been very different, I’m not saying that you do not have a grievance, I’m saying simply that I cannot judge based on our experiences in the same vein as you, and that in order for the issue to be put to rest the way it *should* be, a formal complaint needs to be filed. An arbiter is not there to look pretty, though evidently thats the role that people thinks the arbiter plays, and that the correct way of handling any situation is to use personal issues to attack someone publically and politically, especially if they are running for board.

Someone else even mentioned that they thought the election “interview” process was supposed to be painful, greuling, and so examining that no realistic human being could be meant to survive, that a superhuman are the only ones who really pass muster…. now I know I’m twisting an exaggerationg, but thats what it sounded like they were saying. If all newcomers get that idea, then people’s personal lives better be guarded like hell if you even think if running for the board in the future, because “these yunguns, they out f’blood”.

My biggest admonishment to everyone is that everything seems amazingly suspect when it comes the eve of election, and they let the guy do everything from take board minutes to be vice chair of *security* for a huge operational nightmare. Obviously the people involved heavily (not you) didn’t see fit to complain then…. and they *should have* if there was something serious at that point to complain about.

As far as we could tell the last few times we’ve seen him that he’s calmed down quite a bit on this front, that someone else has held a grudge for personal affronts from years ago (takes offense when he says he thinks he would do well in a position she now occupies, indicating a hairtrigger reaction), and another is a very close friend of hers, and us women, you know we stick together…. and I probably would except for one thing… its so damned similar to what happened to me… I can’t condone it. Period. I don’t like witchhunts, I never will, as a tranny, I’ve seen too many of them to feel comfortable with them.

The key words of the day should be Due Process. When thats in effect, I will support you all the way, I can’t obviously back anything up as a character witness, having vastly different experience, but I would back up anyone sticking up for themselves in a formal process.

I’m sorry if you felt any of my statements or rantings were out of place.

Re: Huh?

Nice try – but then I don’t expect any less from a lawyer 🙂

Of course Flagg said that we didn’t a BOARD that took OFFICIAL action based on rumor. However I believe that letting people know that there will be no 11th our abuse of the process neither a BOARD nor is it, in any sense of makign a motion or other official move, an action at all.

On the other hand, I fully expect that a reminder that the rules will be followed is hardly somehtign anyone can take much objection to…

Except the lawyers of course 🙂

BTW Alan, good questions last night. I always appreciate someone who will actuallys peak up about their concerns outright and in person 🙂

Huh?

I’m not going to credit rumors as gospel- I am just reacting to the rumors I’ve gotten.

Ok… You’re reacting to gossip and rumors… Got it.

Didn’t you just write:Otherwise, we have a BoD that starts taking formal action, abriging the priveliges or even the membership of TES members based on hearsay and gossip. Do you really want that?Not saying who’s right here… but it seems both sides are reacting to gossip and rumors.

I’m not going to credit

rumors as gospel- I am just reacting to the rumors I’ve gotten.

And yes, I’m running for Parlimentarian- but that does not exempt me from doing my job, and doing my part to keep the elections above board. If there is no attempt to subvert the process, I have nothing I need to do.

What efforts are being made to subvert the election?

Also, I thought you were a candidate, and not running the election.