Pissing Contest, Part Deux

Where it stands at this hour…which is 1140 hrs MDT. I’ve been waiting all morning in the hope I’d have some good news to post, but it looks like The Proverbial Fat Lady has done sung her last note.

Pity, that. Anyway…here’s what happened since you last looked in, Gentle Reader:

-from- Buck Pennington
-to- Lori Fye ,
Lowell ,
Dick -
-date- Oct 30, 2007 6:31 PM-
-subject- Re: USAFRSVets Message Not Posted-

Hey Woody... You're famous (scroll down and you'll see a link to my post about this krep). Only 2,215 visits today , but over five million, total. And I've had eight hits on my blog from the link already. More will be be forthcoming.

You'll note...if you go that far... that I said in comments to the post that the jury's still out. And I will "make nice" if you allow my post to go through, with an appropriate post on my blog and on blogs where this lil tempest in a teapot has been noted. No pressure intended...it just is what it is. But you really are making an ass out of yourself, and... by association...the group. I don't think you intended for that to happen.

But, once again, it is what it is.

Regards,
bp

On 10/30/07 (5:29 PM), Buck Pennington wrote:

Woody, Laurie,

To be perfectly frank...I don't give a big rat's ass about what the BBB does or doesn't say about Soldiers Angels or VALOUR-IT. I care about results and the organization's reputation among the troops. I know, personally, one of the VPs in the SA organization and I've been more or less intimately involved with them and their work for two years.

Let me ask you this: if you took the time to look up SA with BBB, did you take the time to check out any of the URLs I provided in my original message or in my subsequent message (the " hundreds of Milbloggers")? If SA is a scam organization, they have sure hoodwinked a frickin' lot of reputable, honest, and dedicated service members...active and retired. Further, did you see any of the testimonials on the SA site, particularly this one?

January 18th, 2006

Dear Mrs. Smith,
It was brought to my attention that your organization, Soldier's Angels, did something very special for the Marines of our Injured Support Battalion. I want to take this time and thank you so much for your contribution to make special memories for those who sacrifice so much.

Your contribution of laptops is quite above and beyond. I am grateful that you have taken time to honor our injured heroes.

I remain...

(jpg of Lt. Gen. James F. Amos signature block)

How many times do you think a USMC Lieutenant General's been snookered, Woody? And snookered LATELY?

I'm with Lori. The SA organization isn't the frickin' Red Cross with a Red Cross-like bureaucracy. It's a true grass-roots organization that is composed entirely of volunteers. And these volunteers work their collective asses off for the troops, and do their BEST to comply with all the damned legal requirements the government has...in order to achieve 501 (c) (3) status.

Further...you could have asked these questions right after I sent my first note instead of beating around the frickin' bush with weasel words that failed to (a) answer my question directly and (b) come to the point...if you had a frickin' point to begin with...aside from being what I perceive to be an arbitrary control freak.

If I sound pissed it's only because I AM. You've ripped your frickin' knickers with ME, Woody. A little basic research on your part immediately after I sent my first note would have prevented all this crap.

If you choose to allow my post through to the USAFRSV group I'll resubmit. But only for the exposure to the 2,000+ vets who may not be aware this program exists. Some of those guys might have sons or daughters that are serving (I have two sons on active duty...both career officers), and it's not outside the realm of possibility that one of those sons or daughters just might NEED a voice activated laptop.

In closing, I'm with Lori, yet again, on the subject of moderation. It's simply not needed and is often abused, as in this case. QED.

Regards,
bp

On 10/30/07 (4:45 PM), Lori Fye wrote:

Sigh ...

Woody, it seems, from reading the BBB's report, that Soldier Angels doesn't meet their requirements due to some rather petty rules about what the organization hasn't provided in the way of financials. Perhaps Soldier Angels is simply too busy serving the troops to be able to meet all of the BBB's criteria in a timely fashion. That's my instinctive best guess.

Personally, I would've passed through Buck's post -- in fact, it appeared on "my" Fortuna AFS group. Then again, I handle that group differently, requiring potential members to tell me why they should belong to the group before they can join, rather than moderating every post. I don't have time to do that, plus I trust that the group's members are mature and trustworthy enough to post appropriately. Rarely do I have to deal with spam, or even with offensive posts. (Recently, I did have to write to someone off-list to ask her not to send jokes that are potentially offensive. That member immediately complied with my request, and remained a member of the group as well.)

Unfortunately, this isn't the first time that a decision to disallow a post on USAF RSV has caused someone to leave. This particular decision stings quite a bit, though, as the VALOUR-IT program is a good one and something that supports our VERY deserving wounded troops.

Still mulling over my membership in USAF RSV,
Lori

On 10/30/07 (4:21 PM), Lowell wrote:

Lori,

I believe you know Dick and I moderate the messages with member majority in mind. All the while, we have the primary objective of keeping on subject with radar sites experiences, etc. Some messages, we allow to go forth, as with the blue dot tail lights, because that experience is from the era of many in the group.

When we get a message with url reference, we review the website being passed along. With that review, first we ask, is this something thats well publicized and something any of the members (if interested in the subject matter of that the web involved) can google and bring up on their own. Then we ask, is this something that's reputable and and radar sites related.

The BBB has the following on the url

http://charityreports.bbb.org/public/Report.aspx?CharityID=1687

I'm sorry we can't please everyone with our moderation. I'm sorry we can't feel free to allow all messages to go through.

As you know, I have much respect for your, your opinions and I will hate it very much if you decide to disassociate yourself.

Buck, I don't know you, but with you and Lori having been friends for 30 years, I believe you to be a person of very high character and standards. If you feel the BBB report is off base and if you feel we should go forth with the posting, let us know and we'll roundtable it again, with closer scrutiny.

Thanks, both of you, for your input, for without input, from you we don't know when we're doing good (or bad). And, we do keep an open mind to input from the members.

Woody
-----Original Message-----
From: Lori Fye
Sent: Oct 30, 2007 12:19 PM
To: Buck Pennington , Lowell
Cc: Dick
Subject: Re: USAFRSVets Message Not Posted

Thanks for including me in this discussion, Buck.

Woody, after reading Buck's blog post about VALOUR-IT, I requested him to repost the item at USAF RSV and on the Fortuna AFS board. (Buck and I were both stationed at Fortuna, at the same time, and we are friends of some 30 years.)

I am dismayed that Buck's post, which is in support of an extremely good cause, has been rejected. Makes me reconsider my association with USAF RSV, too.

Lori

I was hopeful last evening that this brouhaha would be resolved amicably, and in favor of the Valour-IT project. But it looks like my hopes will not materialize. The last word I had from Our Moderators is in the message trail above. Looks like the “roundtable,” if it occurred, didn’t change anything.

Do ya think my last word was too harsh? Just askin’…