ThenNow Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 46 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said: CynicalScouter needed a timeout. His behavior was abusive, even if I agree with his points more often than n You all know CS and I are pretty much in agreement. When not, I reply. Even I felt buried by the speed, high volume and intensity that was being generated, fostered and perpetuated. And, I noted it and asked for a step back and a deep breath. That said, some of the mostly interpersonal, unresolvable conflicts of opinion between select individuals become a recycling of things already said many times, just with increasing volume. Granted, new people enter the conversation all the time, but I’ve found myself wanting to ask people to go shuffle off to DM or request the moderators designate some discussions UCBP (Unresolvable Conflict Between Posters). I have no clue how they do their task and don’t want to try or learn. I would be known as the Red King, if you get my point, er, blade’s edge. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsch322 Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 36 minutes ago, ThenNow said: Please explain. I get the “not [yours] to give,” but your Council is free to release, compare and rebut, no? It’s hard to feel good about refusing disclosure while saying, “They are clearly wrong” without allowing anyone else the ability to see, assess and come to their own conclusion. Simply, it looks like hiding and hiding usually means something is damaging in the report. Just me? No not just you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 We have the hearing agenda (at least the current version). Basically, from what I can tell, primary battles over discovery requests. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/963b908b-4745-4ddd-8dce-09e0789f8fbd_6635.pdf Moving Insurers vs Eric Green - Discovery BSA vs TCC and many others - Discovery Paul Mones request to no longer be counsel for client Insurance companies vs aggregators vs Coalition (Discovery of aggregators & Coalition fee request) Law firm fighting against insurance companies over subpoena of aggregators Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InquisitiveScouter Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 12 minutes ago, johnsch322 said: No not just you. Whenever I ask for financials, I always get the "Why do you want to know?" To me, that is the first sign someone is hiding something. I even got this when I asked for IRS 990s. At least for the IRS 990s, I wrote back, "Because the law says you have to provide them." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel947 Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 7 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said: Whenever I ask for financials, I always get the "Why do you want to know?" To me, that is the first sign someone is hiding something. I even got this when I asked for IRS 990s. At least for the IRS 990s, I wrote back, "Because the law says you have to provide them." Lucky they didn't ban you. Amazing for an organization with ideals like Scouting, that so many corners of the org are ran so unethically and secretively. Not just the child abuse, but regarding finances and local politics as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vol_scouter Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 2 hours ago, ThenNow said: Please explain. I get the “not [yours] to give,” but your Council is free to release, compare and rebut, no? It’s hard to feel good about refusing disclosure while saying, “They are clearly wrong” without allowing anyone else the ability to see, assess and come to their own conclusion. Simply, it looks like hiding and hiding usually means something is damaging in the report. Just me? As a board member, I receive council information. Since this chapter 11, the legal counsel requested that we not release any information. Whenever the attorney advises that the information can be released, the council will do so. My actions are in keeping with my obligations as a board member and in keeping with the Scout Law. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wondering Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 3 hours ago, ThenNow said: I know everyone didn’t watch last night. I did. Though gravely disappointed that Dr. Kennedy didn’t give an encore recitation of his feelings on the Hoover Plan, Article from the L.A. Times today: Boy Scouts payout disputed (pagesuite.com) Note 4th paragraph 😉 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InquisitiveScouter Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Sentinel947 said: Lucky they didn't ban you. Amazing for an organization with ideals like Scouting, that so many corners of the org are ran so unethically and secretively. Not just the child abuse, but regarding finances and local politics as well. My SE did take adverse action...removed me from all council and district positions...and never had the courtesy to let me know...had to hear it from other volunteers when they were submitting rosters for training staffs and renewing district/council positions. Edited October 15, 2021 by InquisitiveScouter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 16 minutes ago, Wondering said: Article from the L.A. Times today: Boy Scouts payout disputed (pagesuite.com) Note 4th paragraph 😉 Has anyone seen an article with actual sex abuse survivors saying to vote for this plan? Between twitter, Facebook, this forum and news articles .... every single claimant I can find wants to reject this plan. Note I still expect a large number of yes votes. I think a lot of people will just listen to their attorneys and the coalition is telling them to vote yes. Plus, all who signed over power of attorney to coalition lawyers will be yes votes (unless they take back that power of attorney). However, the public facing claimants seem to be consistently rejecting the deal. So, if it passes, would the judge consider that as part of her ruling on the plan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabid Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 Just got an email from AIS recommending I vote yes. Repeatedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsch322 Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 35 minutes ago, Rabid said: Just got an email from AIS recommending I vote yes. Repeatedly. And Tim Kosnoff one of the original AIS lawyers says “ I don’t know what to say, really, about AIS joint venture partner Ken Rothweiler’s statements about this plan. I want you to understand that I repudiate them for being false and misleading. I can’t control what he says but he not being truthful w anybody.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 55 minutes ago, Rabid said: Just got an email from AIS recommending I vote yes. Repeatedly. I understand completely if not, but if you would be willing to share any elements of the argument, beneath and between the begging, I would be grateful. I’m grasping to understand how they are building, supporting and sustaining their mantra that this is “the best we can do” and “there’s more to come, pinky swear.” I understand the Consortium that shall not be named is gearing up for an internal dog and pony show. If only I had a ticket. Where is my invisibility cloak when I need it? Meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted October 15, 2021 Share Posted October 15, 2021 (edited) 51 minutes ago, johnsch322 said: Ken Rothweiler’s The Ken Rottweiler of champagne wishes and caviar tears fame? TK, if you’re lurking, please feel free to appropriate that line. In all due disregard for modesty, it’s a beaut! It deserves some legs beyond this forum. Edited October 16, 2021 by ThenNow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 3 hours ago, Eagle1993 said: Note I still expect a large number of yes votes. I think a lot of people will just listen to their attorneys and the coalition is telling them to vote yes. Plus, all who signed over power of attorney to coalition lawyers will be yes votes (unless they take back that power of attorney). My recollection is, the all encompassing numbers tossed about by both AIS and the Consortium that shall not be named have far fewer clients who signed up and gave them powers to act. Anyone know the numbas? I realize the are still seeking POAs, but there were some stats used to refute their previous assertions that they could deliver the votes on a platinum platter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 (edited) Oops. Edited October 16, 2021 by ThenNow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts