|
Post by danieclarke on Feb 3, 2012 20:49:23 GMT -5
so we have this link (forum) here but what happens to all the supporters and their knowledge of what has transpired? Do they like me get to know the facts? When and if not how can this scandle be controlled so as not to cause disruption in our progress??
This forum isn't linked to the site so well its hidden and people will say it was created to keep the talk off the FB group and site
I have to go volunteer to a neighbor again tomorrow.. please salvage my organization and make it work and not just for the few of you disgruntled volunteers.. but for all the people of the USA
good nite and may god bless us all
|
|
|
Post by karliecole on Feb 3, 2012 20:50:04 GMT -5
The funds of the 99D have never been in Michael Pollok's personal account. That is a bald-faced lie. The funds have always been under the control of the board. Whoever is trying to take this thing down with false accusations should stop.
|
|
|
Post by danieclarke on Feb 3, 2012 20:51:38 GMT -5
The funds of the 99D have never been in Michael Pollok's personal account. That is a bald-faced lie. The funds have always been under the control of the board. Whoever is trying to take this thing down with false accusations should stop. thank you karlie for that truth
|
|
|
Post by forbesmb on Feb 3, 2012 20:51:46 GMT -5
Mind you, I'm not going to outright vilify anyone; however, the personal choices made do not favor Michael P. Perhaps he's upset at having resigned and is making poor choices as a result... frustration can do that.
I'm just worried that this will turn out poorly and we'll lose everything we've worked for due to a simple ego clash and one individual not handling it well.
|
|
|
Post by hendrimike on Feb 3, 2012 20:52:20 GMT -5
the donor asked to be on the board and that decision was tabled. the donor no matter what will give the money if michael p complies. they have stated so and are doing so. the donor is anonymous because they wish to be anonymous. nothing we can do about that.
|
|
|
Post by karliecole on Feb 3, 2012 20:52:46 GMT -5
Michael P on the other hand has donated a substantial amount of his own money to the 99D, has posted all statements on FB and/or the website for financial transparency, has polled decisions on FB to give people the voice and has allowed the negative posters more free reign than should have been tolerated.
|
|
|
Post by forbesmb on Feb 3, 2012 20:53:54 GMT -5
It's a personal account if only one individual has any access to it.
Simple fact of definition.
|
|
|
Post by danieclarke on Feb 3, 2012 20:54:56 GMT -5
NO TO DONOR BEING ON THE BOARD... WE WILL NOT BE BOUGHT...
|
|
|
Post by karliecole on Feb 3, 2012 20:56:46 GMT -5
The donor was on the board and could have done whatever she wanted to make it in compliance. It is actually in compliance. The donor is anonymous to manipulate from behind the scenes and left the board at the same time she withheld the matching funds. Michael P. is doing his best to hand things over and still due his fiduciary duties properly. He is not attacking the group following his resignation. Others continue to attack him and repeat things that are not true. A neutral review is underway but still they continue to spread this. Most of what I am saying about financial transparency and polls can be verified by anyone who wants to do so. It is online.
|
|
|
Post by danieclarke on Feb 3, 2012 20:57:27 GMT -5
I'll be a board member.. i have been here since the beginning and i have not signed up to be a delegate.. and yes i have donated but only 250.00 ... i will do it as a representative to all the supporters here who need a voice of balance
|
|
|
Post by danieclarke on Feb 3, 2012 20:59:46 GMT -5
I hate when people trash others.. and all i have heard are disgruntled volunteers trash people
|
|
|
Post by hendrimike on Feb 3, 2012 21:00:01 GMT -5
karlie you are starting to give up the donor by making known the gender of the donor.
|
|
|
Post by forbesmb on Feb 3, 2012 21:00:48 GMT -5
Given that the donor asked to be on the board, I would certainly say that should be a given, "Respectfully, no", at least as far as their donation affecting their potential board status.
I'll be honest... the basic gist I'm getting out of this... the most simple definition of this conflict, is the consensus of the majority versus the opinion of the minority. Even with what you've explained, Karlie, it looks more like a hissy fit than anything else. Believe me, I've been there... incredibly agitated when the local GA makes a decision with which I don't agree. However, I don't break away from them when things aren't going my way and I sure as hell don't walk away (resign).
What needs to happen is for Michael P. to talk, not you. I'm sorry, but you are not him and, therefore, cannot provide actual motivation or understanding of his actions. I appreciate your trying to provide the information, but, honestly, we need him to start talking to those of us not on the board or any of the committees.
|
|
|
Post by karliecole on Feb 3, 2012 21:01:11 GMT -5
That personal FB page, the Ninety Nine Percent Declaration was set-up before Michael knew much about how FB works - it has 5000 members. It has been discussed multiple times what to do with it to try to correct that and thus far it was always determined that it should be left to keep contact with the 5000 members. MP posted 2 polls. That is not a hack. It is asking for the people's voice - which others seem to have a problem with while saying that is what they are about - the people's voice. Simultaneously they accuse of unilateral decision making - yet if you've been here awhile, you have seen many, many polls.
Seems a bit of group think/mob rule is going on. All I can suggest is to think for yourself.
|
|
|
Post by danieclarke on Feb 3, 2012 21:04:16 GMT -5
i have copied pasted both pages until my post here so they better not change and please others keep saving this discussion for all and the sake of the truth
|
|