Excuse me, your grievance is showing...
The APIA communications meeting on 6 March was an opportunity for all APIA members (including you, Kim) to be informed and ask questions of the board in person ... about Ashley Church’s sudden departure, related contractual issues, the apparent misappropriation of the APIA database, the litigation with the Traders resulting from all that ... and other matters like proposed new election guidelines and the board’s vision/planning.
For me, the timeline presented by APIA’s solicitor and her summary of the forensic report on the deleted APIA laptop were illuminating. So was the fairly frank general discussion at the meeting -- which led towards mediation.
That widely-advertised APIA meeting was the board’s chosen forum for the appropriate discussion of such issues -- not PropertyTalk. But you didn’t attend it, Kim.
I said earlier I’m not speaking on anyone else’s behalf. Nor am I here to address your movable feast of ‘questions and concerns’. I see them as being raised here in this manner simply to malign the APIA board -- against whom you have admitted you are nurturing a severe grievance.
You’ve been voluble and repeatedly made extremely negative statements about the board volunteers: referring to ‘dirty politics’, a lack of integrity, a ‘hijacked’ election, a ‘gang of 4’, a ‘gross miscarriage of the democratic process’, inexcusable, unconscionable, highly unethical [behaviour] etc etc. -- language fit for a smear campaign, in my opinion. I don’t expect you will agree, but it is.
Your latest list of 7 ‘questions’ about the board’s post in reply illustrates my point. (Into another foxhole looking for mud.)
I made the coffee invitation out of respect for you, believe it or not. Given your declaration that you won’t ‘step foot in another APIA meeting’ under the current leadership (your own respect for them having completely ‘evaporated’) I thought, well, perhaps a middle ground?
I wasn’t offering a ‘meeting’ in any official capacity to sort out your ‘beef’, just a chance to talk things over as association members without the misunderstandings and misreading of tone that can be an unfortunate by-product of email and forum posts. It’s up to you.
As you say, I am defending people I believe to be honest and ethical. Exactly. I’ll continue to do that as I’ve defended others on this forum since I joined in 2003. I care about the ecology of PropertyTalk.
You’ve asked me to ‘step aside’. -- Why should I, Kim? My posts aren’t preventing anyone else from speaking for themselves. While I can’t devote the time and energy to this thread that you clearly can, I’m not going to stand back and watch you defame decent people.
- Peter
The APIA communications meeting on 6 March was an opportunity for all APIA members (including you, Kim) to be informed and ask questions of the board in person ... about Ashley Church’s sudden departure, related contractual issues, the apparent misappropriation of the APIA database, the litigation with the Traders resulting from all that ... and other matters like proposed new election guidelines and the board’s vision/planning.
For me, the timeline presented by APIA’s solicitor and her summary of the forensic report on the deleted APIA laptop were illuminating. So was the fairly frank general discussion at the meeting -- which led towards mediation.
That widely-advertised APIA meeting was the board’s chosen forum for the appropriate discussion of such issues -- not PropertyTalk. But you didn’t attend it, Kim.
I said earlier I’m not speaking on anyone else’s behalf. Nor am I here to address your movable feast of ‘questions and concerns’. I see them as being raised here in this manner simply to malign the APIA board -- against whom you have admitted you are nurturing a severe grievance.
You’ve been voluble and repeatedly made extremely negative statements about the board volunteers: referring to ‘dirty politics’, a lack of integrity, a ‘hijacked’ election, a ‘gang of 4’, a ‘gross miscarriage of the democratic process’, inexcusable, unconscionable, highly unethical [behaviour] etc etc. -- language fit for a smear campaign, in my opinion. I don’t expect you will agree, but it is.
Your latest list of 7 ‘questions’ about the board’s post in reply illustrates my point. (Into another foxhole looking for mud.)
I made the coffee invitation out of respect for you, believe it or not. Given your declaration that you won’t ‘step foot in another APIA meeting’ under the current leadership (your own respect for them having completely ‘evaporated’) I thought, well, perhaps a middle ground?
I wasn’t offering a ‘meeting’ in any official capacity to sort out your ‘beef’, just a chance to talk things over as association members without the misunderstandings and misreading of tone that can be an unfortunate by-product of email and forum posts. It’s up to you.
As you say, I am defending people I believe to be honest and ethical. Exactly. I’ll continue to do that as I’ve defended others on this forum since I joined in 2003. I care about the ecology of PropertyTalk.
You’ve asked me to ‘step aside’. -- Why should I, Kim? My posts aren’t preventing anyone else from speaking for themselves. While I can’t devote the time and energy to this thread that you clearly can, I’m not going to stand back and watch you defame decent people.
- Peter
Comment