ThenNow

Do you mind sharing who told you this? I ask only because it of course isn't true as bankruptcy is practiced and it's important for all of us to know when we can where bad information may be coming from. I absolutely understand if you don't want to share it! Oo. Oo. Let him quote me. I asked first. Fair is fair. 😬

That was a tangential comment I heard, as well. I was a little dubious/concerned, but was hopeful it was correct. For me, it was conversation I read surrounding the potential entry into Chapter 11. Would you be willing to identify your direct source? You may have mentioned this before, but I’d like to confirm. As you know, this whole thing makes me very sad, for all the reasons you expressed very well.

At least you’re only “thought police” and not slouching toward dream police. Cheap Trick would have an infringement suit slapped on you in a NY minute, anyway.

Four questions: 1) Who selects this person? 2) On what basis? 2) Is he already known? (Maybe the fella who spoke on the Coalition Informercial last week?) 4) Do we know if this person is prepared to give $1M annually? If so, I will believe he might have a voice that stands a chance of being heard and making an impact. If not, not so much.

I wonder if there will be guest appearances pretty soon. Oo. I hope so. Rumor has it Jessica Lauria and Peter Anker are fab on a talk show.

Yupper...

Did anyone else watch the Coalition Town Crier event?

If you would, please explain these two sentences. I think I had a Monday afternoon blackout.

To comment briefly, only on the public perception and not the motive, many were confused by this. It was instrumental in securing them a position at the mediation table, imnsho. For many month the media represented them to be, effectively, the replacement entity to the TCC. I, and others, contacted them to object loudly and often. The media have since made it clear they are not, in part by doing a much better job covering what the TCC is saying and doing. For a good stretch there, I was pretty upset about it.

That’s fine and I get it. So, you don’t like me? I’ll accept that too. Anyone with a JD or Esq. is anathema. We are the untouchables. Got that, too. To extrapolate your argument, an architect can’t critique another architect who, say, designed a large residential building with defective rebar or concrete. Verboten, self-serving and duplicitous. One physician can’t testify against another physician in a clear cut cut med mal case. Verboten, disingenuous and hypocritical. A used car salesman with high integrity cannot comment on under the table dealings of another, even though he has sound basis and evidence. Verboten, guilty by professional association and insincere. Roger all that. I can go on. PS - Yes. A used car salesman can be of high integrity. He’s a former Eagle Scout, Pack Leader, volunteers without pay to clean and maintain the camp, fights for YP reform and buys his kids ice cream so they won’t stink in his Suburban on the way home.

That’s not what he said nor what I said. He said, they are racing to the bottom because the need to pay other people off and get theirs. I said, they have no experience and he has bushels full. Comparative, not dispositive nor conclusory. In my view, the single operative point and only relevant presupposition to your post is, “I don't care for lawyers, even the ones that represent me.” Why? They charge a legal contingency on outcome. Solution? Go it alone and never hire one again, if you dislike them (us) so. And, to be consistent, never associate yourself with anyone who works on commission. Don’t buy a new car, sell or buy a house, hold or purchase additional insurance coverage or work with other than a fee-based investment advisor, to name a few. I can come up with a more comprehensive list when you need it. Easy peasy. Let me know when you’re ready to engage the conversation with “clean hands and a pure heart.” I’ll be right here.

I beg to differ, as to there being no distinction between their respective “cuts,” as you say. This is an attorney with decades of experience representing Scouting child sexual abuse victims. Those other folks are “Lemme get on the gravy train” Johnnies come lately. Night and day difference. Let’s find out how much experience those who used aggregators have. Being funded by outside money, which a number of judges who do mass tort cases do not like at all, cannot be equated to Tim Kosnoff’s history and experience. I have said this repeatedly here, just so I’m not accused of defending him simply because we have concurring opinions. He doesn’t need this case or this money. The other guys want the money and need it to pay off the loan sharks, thus their ‘quick’ settlements and race to the bottom.

I should’ve just said, “I would love to see it named The Force Awakens. Is there anyone else who would like to see it so named and, if so, would you be willing to voice that interest?” Seven of my eight did. Not too shabby. It’s a bunch-a-lota football when you include the kids’ schools, my wife’s and mine. My oldest son’s school had the dubious distinction of being part of the ugliest mess I’ve seen in college football. At least they were on the winning side, though it was the dangerous side for about 20 minutes. Sorry. I am way off topic, though not concerned about it on this cool Monday morning.

Good grief you guys. Did all your teams lose this weekend and your dog pooped on the bed to make it worse? Just a joke, for Pete’s sake.

Um, read my post in light of the post to which I am responding. I think you’re swatting a phantom gnat.

I’m fuzzy on the forum law, but I don’t think that can be a fiat decision by the Moderators. I move for a vote to so name it. Do I have a second?

This definitely is the punchline and a succinct summary.

Yup. Same script, different actors. “I hear you have leadership potential…I’m going to let you join early,” followed by an affirming, lingering pat on the noggin.

Hm. Albert Brooks big moment in Network News. Yeah. That works or maybe Anchor Man? It was not pretty. They did speak and none of them did well. I didn’t note the names. They used onscreen teleprompter slides and would get off pace. They’d have to call for, “Last slide…next slide…go back to the last slide.” Reminded me of a shaky politician I once saw. One fella was swiveling back and forth in his desk chair. Looked like a teenager. Ken was pale, parched, puckered and pleading.

I doubt it, but if it is I’m sending it to every media contact I have. It was weak with a capital EEK. I’m serious. If they were representing me, I would have a high degree of disappointment, concern about the focus and preparedness, and no small measure of embarrassment.

Well, they said 2k. 19 questions to the TCC’s 200 answered? I very, very seriously doubt that. Rothweiler looked scared, rattled, unprepared and cotton-mouthed. I’m not just saying that. As a stage and production guy, it was a red hot Hot Chicken mess. Swing and a whiff. By a mile. I would like to hear from any Coalition client(s) who came away with overwhelming confidence in their counsel and advice given. Anyone? Going once…

Let me add, half hour and ‘answered’ 19 questions, most of which weren’t questions. No response to mine. Might be too many coming in they can’t or don’t want to answer. I was told the TCC answered 200+ in an hour. Gimme a break. This show ain’t ready for the road. Lotta dog. No pony or saddle-ready cowboys.

Train wreck. They need a producer, coaching, a writer, an editor, more water for Ken…and, for the love of mercy, would someone please send Ken flowers and some multivitamins? He’s working night and day, and day and night. Crisscrossing the globe chasin nickels and twisting arms. BooHoo. Fa’gedabadit. Can’t take it. Now, “they’re not taking fees out of the survivors’ pocket…like other professionals.” Say what? “If you don’t approve, 5-10 years of litigation” pretty much guaranteed. I’m out…

This is part of the challenge we face. When you see the aged faces, presentation, intelligence and personalities of some of the men who were abused as children while in Scouting, it’s easy to forget each was once just little boy. Some not so little, but still boys. Think of a vulnerable 10 year old you know who has a passel of siblings, is maybe a middle child, his dad is unavailable both emotionally and as to his time. Mom is chasing other kids. He is smart and eager, but has no mentor. See him? That’s me. My SM groomed me from the first second he met me. Pick another. Young man with athletic ability. Father died young. He and his mom are hurting and vulnerable. Both could use assistance with this gaping hole in their lives and they chose Scouting. There, a monster finds him and preys upon him and his mother. That’s a friend of mine. I am fairly emotionally astute and have something of a pain and trauma radar. I can often see the child in someone that has long since faded from physical view. In Wilmington at that TCC selection process, I saw a room full of scared and angry boys wanting someone to take the time to see and hear them. It was heartbreaking. David Buchbinder, of the US Trustee’s Office, said after selection that picking the 9 members of the BSA TCC was the hardest thing he’s ever had to do. I believe him. He heard from 80-100 (?) deeply wounded boys that day. All day long. One after the other after the other.

How do you discern the fiduciary line of whom you are to serve first and most aggressively? Here it is Local Council (and I know and your Scouts), but is the rationale you’re doing “your duty to God and your country, obeying the Scout Law” then, in descending order of priority “help(ing) other people at all times”? There are tens of thousands of you/their/somebody’s former Scouts on this side of the information vacuum. It seems Local Councils, legal advice or not, didn’t make any of the lists, that I recall. I bailed 40 years ago, so I’m rusty. It seems what is most protected in this entrenched unwillingness to disclose is the truth or falsity about someone’s financial representations. One or t’other. I am not poking or judging. You went to the fiduciary defense and to the Scout law, so I’m just askin. I’ve been in very tough spots where I had to determine to whom I owed the highest degree of loyalty and honor, based on the true sense of a fiduciary and the vulnerability of one party vs the power and leverage of the other. The word literally means “trust,” as in trustworthy. We’re just asking for the truth, on which all trust is built. “On advice of counsel” doesn’t show up in any of the Scout guidelines, Law, Oath, rules, Motto or the old Leni Lenape recitations from OA. Not even the Slogan or Outdoor Code, for that matter.