Chapter 11 Announced - Part 5 - RSA Ruling

[vol_scouter]

28 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

For you active Scouters, I hope this doesn’t put a damper on the candid discussion here. 

Of course it does and always has.

[InquisitiveScouter]

18 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

Of course it does and always has.

Nope...does not put a damper on it.

A mentor of mine pointed out long ago...yes, there is often a price for telling the truth, but there is also a price for not saying anything when the truth needs to be spoken.

[MYCVAStory]

57 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

For you active Scouters, I hope this doesn’t put a damper on the candid discussion here. 

Yeah, that candid conversation is important but sometimes you have to watch what you say.  Let's all remember this tidbit that was entered into the court record from Mr. Kosnoff, defender of victims when he mistakenly hit "reply all" to the wrong group.  Best interest of ALL victims or one group?

Yes but no more. We need to control our power. Not just to the committee but to everyone - mediators, BSA, councils etc. 

JH told you Stang told Pasich to shut down until Nov. You realize don’t you that WE did that. Anne and Jon aren’t handing over any of their data to anyone unless and until this gets sorted out. Andolina and the 3 Amigos need to get that message. They are wasting their time talking to the TCC. 

 

Here is the message: We control 80% of the claims I.e our coalition controls the case. 

 

We are not going to do anything to help grease the gears for Stang and the dimwits including speeding up the insurance analysis. Ken, that’s playing in to the Andolina Stang program. 

 

Message is: we’re not playing. 

 

I’ve got a new strategy. I’m calling it the Seinfeld Shift. You’ll like it. 

 

It means we relax, keep focused on our marketing and media efforts going full tilt in to Nov, chill and enjoy our summer and evaluate in the fall. We have the luxury of doing nothing.

 

 Either that or go sell 15-30M of our case to a motherfunder to let it and AG digitally rape us for nine months. 

 

The network execs to Jerry and George Costanza about the sitcom idea Jerry and George are pitching:

 

Q: “Yes, but what is the sitcom about?”

 

Jerry and George  confidently smiling ear to ear: “It’s about nothing, nothing at all.”

 

I think you guys already know but don’t want to tell me that the JH gambit was a failure. Regardless I can already see it. 

 

Nothing happens until AIS says so. We smile, nod our heads and do nothing, nothing at all. 

 

Me? I’m going sailing. 

[ThenNow]

41 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

If Kosnoff is reading here, who knows what other parties are watching?  

He definitely is or via a surrogate. Count on it being a broad sampling of people involved or interested in the case, either personally, professionally or institutionally. Without question. 

[ThenNow]

20 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Yeah, that candid conversation is important but sometimes you have to watch what you say.

I have a friend close to the case on the victim side. He has occasionally body checked me if I seem to be going down a path that could be detrimental either to our case, overall, or the morale of our cohort. It’s been enormously appreciated, as I am prone to both verbosity and a quick trigger. Interestingly, he is a distance guy and I a sprinter. When we had to run the “440 yard dash,” the 100 and 200 guys buried ourselves amid the pole vaulting pit foam. I don’t like it, but he’s helping me realize I can’t even see the tape at this point. Don’t even get me started on avoidance measures when we were supposed to time on the half mile and mile. Called in sick that day.

Edited August 25, 2021 by ThenNow

[ThenNow]

57 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

He's quoting random, anonymous strangers off a web forum. It's possible that any of us do not know what we claim to know, or aren't who we claim to be. Not exactly trustworthy sources. 

If you noticed, the source he quoted from this forum is someone who has demonstrated an enormous breadth of knowledge of this case, BSA National, Local, Scouting on the ground and the law, generally. I doubt it was a random pick out a hat.  

[vol_scouter]

23 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

If you noticed, the source he quoted from this forum is someone who has demonstrated an enormous breadth of knowledge of this case, BSA National, Local, Scouting on the ground and the law, generally. I doubt it was a random pick out a hat.  

This is true but the poster to whom you refer is not always correct because of incomplete information.  He does not appear to be on the NEC or NEB and thus does not always have a complete understanding.  Also, he knows about his council and a small number of others.  That does mean that he knows even the most common findings in councils.  He has done a marvelous job in informing us but I would not expect an attorney to be publicly or professionally - or any of us.

[ThenNow]

24 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

I would not expect an attorney to be publicly or professionally - or any of us.

I appreciate the limited correction, but in the main CS has been a great source. Also, he sure ain’t gonna quote someone who doesn’t reinforce his position. I was also suggesting, but didn’t say clearly, that in addition to CS’s knowledge and volume of posts, I doubt TK is reading every line in the thread. He’s referenced CS’s posts before, who is often critical of National and LCs, though not with attribution, as here. Watch him and there are things to Tweet.

As to the the point quoted above, haven’t we come to expect the unexpected from him? Know any other people with a lot of money and a passion (real or projected) who sorta feel they can Tweet with impunity. Morality and code of ethics aside, why not? He’s doing the Tweet thing as an influencer, actual or self-anointed. I’ll take this over someone who sings raunchy songs, wins Grammy’s and talks about political and social matters on which they aren’t qualified to speak and when they do it’s a hot mess.

Edited August 25, 2021 by ThenNow

[SiouxRanger]

5 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

@SiouxRanger may need a new Scout Executive.

Tell me about it.

We are on our 5th SE in 20 years.  Volunteers and staff report to me that the 3rd one was good.

I left direct involvement at the official council level a couple of decades ago because it was clearly a pointless effort. I put all my energy into my unit and the scout camp. Now that I am back at the council working committee level, I am reminded of why I opted out long ago. Nothing has changed.

[PeterHopkins]

3 hours ago, ThenNow said:

For you active Scouters, I hope this doesn’t put a damper on the candid discussion here.

I'll be watching my words. I think Kosnoff is primarily interested in seeing this converted to a Chapter 7 case. The youth of today deserve the opportunity to have a safe, high quality Scouting experience, regardless of what happened in the past. Today's children had nothing to do with it. Kosnoff isn't on board with that.

I decided not to post what I originally had here. I'm unwilling to provide Kosnoff with any bullets.

[MattR]

Only 81 more pages till we find out something new about the bankruptcy. 

I'll have to talk to the other judges as to whether talking about the accuracy of our posters and how incredibly famous our forum now is (as opposed to the case) is cheating.

3 hours ago, ThenNow said:

For you active Scouters, I hope this doesn’t put a damper on the candid discussion here. 

Not a chance. Aren't you the one who said they tended towards verbose?

Anyway, since we've been picked up by the AP and we still have lots of pages to go where is the discussion about victim's needs other than money? I recently heard a discussion about trauma, ptsd, shame and the neuro biology behind it. I understand a little better what people have been through and their comments here make sense. Maybe we can get a page out of it.

[ThenNow]

28 minutes ago, MattR said:

Not a chance. Aren't you the one who said they tended towards verbose?

You got that right. You’d have to find me and then make your way through my security to shut me up. Fat chance my droning will in any anyway be curtailed, other than by my bodychecker friend. 

28 minutes ago, MattR said:

Anyway, since we've been picked up by the AP and we still have lots of pages to go where is the discussion about victim's needs other than money? I recently heard a discussion about trauma, ptsd, shame and the neuro biology behind it. I understand a little better what people have been through and their comments here make sense. Maybe we can get a page out of it.

Do you mean “where is the discussion...” here or in the press? If you’re inviting the neurobiological discussion and research articles, you may get more than one page. Lots more. Was the discussion you heard live or video? Want to go first? 

Also, I put together a pretty decent list in response to the “needs” question some time ago. As I recall, I answered a post by “WIMomma?” (forgive me if I got that wrong).

Edited August 25, 2021 by ThenNow

[David CO]

34 minutes ago, MattR said:

where is the discussion about victim's needs other than money?

Bankruptcies are about money.  Period.  

 

[ThenNow]

1 minute ago, David CO said:

Bankruptcies are about money.  Period.

Not exclusively, in this case. Exclamation point. 

[David CO]

41 minutes ago, MattR said:

Maybe we can get a page out of it.

Feel free to start a separate thread.