Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => 3ABN => Topic started by: Gailon Arthur Joy on January 21, 2008, 08:15:48 PM
-
3ABN's annual membership meeting and first Board meeting of the year is on Thursday, January 24, 2008, and we trust the Membership will significantly expand and the board
will significantly change!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter
-
Interesting, Gailon...how do you think the Board might change?
-
3ABN's annual membership meeting and first Board meeting of the year is on Thursday, January 24, 2008, and we trust the Membership will significantly expand and the board
will significantly change!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter
Intersting days ahead. We all need to be praying about this meeting and its outcome.
-
Those who can should definitely watch and record the 3ABN Live program on that very same evening.
-
I would expect them to adopt changes that would completely restructure the corporation to include some new definition of "members" to give a much broader constituency, the most natural being ASI or its equivalent.
I would also expect to see the board itself restructure a bit as it prepares for a much more serious role in the oversight of the corporation and to include several subcommittees, including its own audit committee. They certainly have the manpower to implement this and management will be much more responsive to the board and far less responsive to the old entrenched management team, including Danny Lee Shelton.
They obviously must do something significant to impress the IRS that they are improving oversight and accountability and try to keep any challenges from the IRS to individuals and not the corporation. We must pray they are successful or a significant investment is endangered.
In summary, I expect a significant increase in the oversight of this and many boards within the Seventh-day Adventist ministries, church affiliated as well as independent.
I do believe this will be very positive step, although considered a bit cumbersome for some of the entrepreneurs in the laity, these are essential to establish due diligence and oversight responsibilities of board members and to keep a lid on inappropriate management and spending processes, and most importantly, to increase accountability to the stockholders in the pews.
-
Are you hoping that the Board will withdraw the lawsuit against Messrs. Pickle and Joy?
-
It would not be possible, or legally sound, for the Board to withdraw the lawsuite against Gailon Arthur Joy and Robert Pickle. Such a move would leave them open to
a claim for misuse of process and expose the lawfirm to liability.
They would have to negotiate a settlement with the defendants and that is possible but hardly in keeping with the objectives they laid out. After all, the lawsuite was clearly neccasary to try to eliminate or handi-cap the continued release of information and documentation supporting the allegations of misconduct, mis-management, poor stewardship of the officers and managers of 3ABN and a lack of proper oversight by the board of directors.
The chairman insists the lawsuite was to bring out the truth about what really happened, but even now they continue to block the production of documentation that is calculated to document our allegations, unless we agree to accept the premise that their documents are subject to impoundment under a confidentiality agreement. Hardly the kind of open and transparent spin they have repeatedly claimed and hardly designed to exonorate the officers and directors of 3ABN.
However, substantial changes to the 3ABN constitution and bylaws and the addition of a constituency, would go far toward acheiving oversight by the stockholders in the pews and certainly gain some accountability for future operations.
However, that will not cure or correct what is already done and there must be accountability for these issues that remain unresolved to this date. That process will require the intercession of the courts and since they have elected to go to court, we will remain in court for years to come.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Has there been any indication from ones close to the situation that the board might be restructured to increase oversight and better control policies at 3ABN?
-
There have numerous suggestions from various sources that this is in the works.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
There have numerous suggestions from various sources that this is in the works.
Gailon Arthur Joy
Looking forward to hearing the outcome of this meeting. Of course, I'm a day ahead here, so I was looking to hear someting today, until I realised the time difference! Silly me! ;D
-
Well, I know that various people have been praying for a positive outcome of this board meeting.
-
What entitles one to be considered a 3ABN "member"?
-
The constitution and bylaws that was existing at all points relevant hereto defines the Members as the Directors. Members =Directors=members and every one hand picked by Danny Lee Shelton until the past year. And they were limited to 3-15 but have clearly moved to 17 based on a recent filing with the FCC. Will stacking the board eventually tip the scale in favor of reformers? Do the reformers have enough time to impress the IRS that they are moving the right direction? Change is clearly in the wind, the only question is: it it too little, too late???
The stockholders in the pews have way too much invested here to let it go lightly.
Prayer is in order here!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
The constitution and bylaws that was existing at all points relevant hereto defines the Members as the Directors. Members =Directors=members and every one hand picked by Danny Lee Shelton until the past year. And they were limited to 3-15 but have clearly moved to 17 based on a recent filing with the FCC. Will stacking the board eventually tip the scale in favor of reformers? Do the reformers have enough time to impress the IRS that they are moving the right direction? Change is clearly in the wind, the only question is: it it too little, too late???
The stockholders in the pews have way too much invested here to let it go lightly.
Prayer is in order here!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
How many hours away are we from that meeting now Gailon? We are certainly making it a matter of prayer.
-
3ABN Today comes on real soon. I will be watching!
-
It does not appear that there will be any broadcast time devoted to today's board meeting today. The only mention I heard of it so far was while everyone was real busy talking Danny up and telling us how wonderful he is. Per Pastor Gilley "We wanted to have him (DS) here with us tonight - he was with us today at the board meeting - but he had another commitment tonight." Maybe DS had an appointment with the IRS tonight and couldn't make the live taping...
-
It does not appear that there will be any broadcast time devoted to today's board meeting today. The only mention I heard of it so far was while everyone was real busy talking Danny up and telling us how wonderful he is. Per Pastor Gilley "We wanted to have him (DS) here with us tonight - he was with us today at the board meeting - but he had another commitment tonight." Maybe DS had an appointment with the IRS tonight and couldn't make the live taping...
:D :D :D
If the board meeting went in a way he didn't like, he may have bagged the broadcast because he didn't want to face the cameras.
I've been told by those that know him that when Jim Gilley's given a leadership role, he will not share it. Was the praise on the show tonight a consolation prize for Danny?
-
Well that's an interesting thought, Soul! Maybe Danny couldn't make it tonight because he was on his way to the Caribbean???
-
Since Danny has been "counselled" not to travel, I doubt that the Carribean would be within the counsellors proposed travel limits.
Besides, Jim made it clear he had another "engagement". I am sure we will hear promptly about the terrific changes and new ideas that Jim referenced. But he made it clear that DLS is still welcome and an important advisor...wonder if that extends to tax and book-keeping matters?
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Since Danny has been "counselled" not to travel, I doubt that the Carribean would be within the counsellors proposed travel limits.
Besides, Jim made it clear he had another "engagement". I am sure we will hear promptly about the terrific changes and new ideas that Jim referenced. But he made it clear that DLS is still welcome and an important advisor...wonder if that extends to tax and book-keeping matters?
Gailon Arthur Joy
I'm thinking again that this is a politically correct way to sideline Danny Shelton while appearing to support him...
Is there any word as to results of the board meeting?
-
author=Artiste link=topic=12.msg261#msg261 date=1201320393]
Is there any word as to results of the board meeting?
It's being kept rather quiet isn't it? Should be something leak out soon.
-
I'm thinking again that this is a politically correct way to sideline Danny Shelton while appearing to support him...
Is that honest?
Did he also say that Linda was welcome as an important adviser? Or is she disqualified because she made too many phone calls?
-
I'm thinking again that this is a politically correct way to sideline Danny Shelton while appearing to support him...
Is that honest?
Did he also say that Linda was welcome as an important adviser? Or is she disqualified because she made too many phone calls?
No. That is not honest Bob. But there appears to be a culture of dishonesty that still pervades 3abn. Seems there's a need to pull it all down and rebuild from the top down and right through.
-
But there appears to be a culture of dishonesty that still pervades 3abn.
I said about the same recently in connection with the lawsuit, and got chastised for it, that my opinion would not constitute evidence in court. As if no evidence exists.
Remember reading this?
Subject: Concerned
From: "Hal Steenson"
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:59:14 -0500
Dear ******,
Thank you for calling and asking our position on John Lomachang's presentation Friday night. Here is 3ABN's statement on this matter. Thank you for helping us pass this on to everyone. Once again we apologize for what happened. It was a total surprise to all of us.
Thank You,
Hal Steenson
This is the statement I sent to Dr. Thompson.
Dr Walt,
I'm hurt, and I'm mad about what John Lomachang preached Friday night. I came out of gross error and felt assured, until his series, that I was moving in the truth. I'm not a scholar on the trumpets, however, even I knew that was wrong. The sad thing is that so many people watching now think this is what we all believe. And all the new people in our church may now accept it as the gospel truth. John's arrogance Sabbath morning goes along with what I told him months ago, "he has become a law unto himself." He is neither answerable nor accountable to no one and as he put it Sabbath morning, he owes no one an apology. If he wants to cut his own throat, so be it, but he sliced 3ABN up by teaching his "Adventists futuristic" opinion on live worldwide television. What he did was not of God or from God.
I'm amazed,
Hal Steenson
Compare that with this written in the spring of 2007:
I know very little about the trumpets and until coming into this denomination had never heard them mentioned. I have never-- at anytime ever sent out an email to anyone concerning what Pastor Lomacang preached about this subject. I have never discussed what Pastor Lomacang shared on this topic with him or anyone.
So who is telling the truth? Hal Steenson in Oct 2005 or Hal Steenson a year and a half later?
I will add this note: I believe that the historicist interpretation of the trumpets is correct, and think that I can may a convincing case to that end.
-
Are they different? Oh, yeah, in 2005 he was a little tipsy and 2007 his memory came back!!! Does that make any sense??? Well, let's try something else:
maybe it is simply a senior moment??? Happens with age, you know.
Bet he can't remember telling Danny and Bro how to set up the Miracle Story either!!!
Memory is such a problem at 3ABN. Maybe it is something in the water down there.
Or is it just part of the 3ABN culture???
Looking for answers here???
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Bet he can't remember telling Danny and Bro how to set up the Miracle Story either!!!
What's the Miracle Story?
-
I'm thinking maybe it's that vegan diet that affects the memory??? :dunno:
Are they different? Oh, yeah, in 2005 he was a little tipsy and 2007 his memory came back!!! Does that make any sense??? Well, let's try something else:
maybe it is simply a senior moment??? Happens with age, you know.
Bet he can't remember telling Danny and Bro how to set up the Miracle Story either!!!
Memory is such a problem at 3ABN. Maybe it is something in the water down there.
Or is it just part of the 3ABN culture???
Looking for answers here???
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I'm thinking maybe it's that vegan diet that affects the memory??? :dunno:
Then my memory must be shot. Been vegan about 29 years. :) How's my memory?
-
Well Bob - your memory seems to be fine! Blows that theory!!!
I'm thinking maybe it's that vegan diet that affects the memory??? :dunno:
Then my memory must be shot. Been vegan about 29 years. :) How's my memory?
-
I watched the repeat of Thursday night's live program.
There wasn't even a word about the 3ABN Board Meeting, therefore, whatever did happen there is obviously being kept under the rug at the moment.
-
Any word yet on what happened at the board meeting?
Do you think they had to sign non-disclosure documents before they went into the room?
-
If it were an Annual Meeting, then so far things are strangely quiet about what happened at that meeting.
-
I see Dr. Walt Thomson sitting in his usual chair at the end of the table in the dining room, closest to the exit door. But. got to think of it, the board is much larger now. They may be meeting in a larger room with room for all. Where? In the church? Or is there another new hall since I was there?
-
Did you miss it??? Appletree knows!!! If you want specifics,
you should ask him.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Did you miss it??? Appletree knows!!! If you want specifics,
you should ask him.
Gailon Arthur Joy
Will he tell you what happened at that board meeting?
-
He already has, over at BlackSDA...or at least he has told what did not happen!!!
What more would like of from him, the truth??? That is an impossibility!!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
He already has, over at BlackSDA...or at least he has told what did not happen!!!
What more would like of from him, the truth??? That is an impossibility!!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Don't hold your breath, waiting for the truth.
-
I watched the repeat of Thursday night's live program.
There wasn't even a word about the 3ABN Board Meeting, therefore, whatever did happen there is obviously being kept under the rug at the moment.
Since Jim Gilley was said to have referenced terrific changes and new ideas, what are they, and still waiting on some word from the Board Meeting!
-
It appears that Danny Shelton is pretty much off the 3ABN schedule for the next two months.
Could this have been one of the actions of the Board meeting?
Shelley Quinn is doing "Rhema" teachings on a regular basis, however.
-
It appears that Danny Shelton is pretty much off the 3ABN schedule for the next two months.
Cold this have been one of the actions of the Board meeting?
Shelley Quinn is doing "Rhema" teachings on a regular basis, however.
Interesting developments. :scratch:
-
Well, as far as things being implemented since the last Board meeting, it continues to appear that Danny Shelton is actively being sidelined from public appearances with 3ABN.
Appletree at BSDA says this is not what is happening.
Is Appletree/DS being sidelined, meanwhile being assured by the new powers that be at 3ABN that he is actually continuing on as a valuable member of the administration of 3ABN?
-
If Danny gets sidelined, he may have more time to post, and might be upset while posting.
That is, if AppleTree is Danny rather than Ronnie Shelton, Ronnie's wife Teresa, Hal Steenson, or John Lomacang.
-
Well, whoever, singular or plural, is behind Appletree, they sure have an intimate knowledge of what's going on in Danny's life...
...not to mention some of the phraseology.
-
If Danny gets sidelined, he may have more time to post, and might be upset while posting.
That is, if AppleTree is Danny rather than Ronnie Shelton, Ronnie's wife Teresa, Hal Steenson, or John Lomacang.
It would be good if Danny/AT came here to answer some of the questions that are not being answered elsewhere. :)
-
Somehow, I don't think he would be brave or bold enough to do that.
-
Was that a challenge, Daryl?
-
Somehow, I don't think he would be brave or bold enough to do that.
He's still in denial?
-
I watched the repeat of Thursday night's live program.
There wasn't even a word about the 3ABN Board Meeting, therefore, whatever did happen there is obviously being kept under the rug at the moment.
Since Jim Gilley was said to have referenced terrific changes and new ideas, what are they, and still waiting on some word from the Board Meeting!
Reply, Appletree and Ian have both proclaimed that there are no changes...nothing to report...
therefore, since our sources clearly were looking for reforms, and there were none, that would mean the board is clearly divided or deluded, take your pick...or wait patiently just a few days, keep your ear to the ground and the rumblings will soon give us much to report, but then what do we know anyway!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Well, as far as things being implemented since the last Board meeting, it continues to appear that Danny Shelton is actively being sidelined from public appearances with 3ABN.
Appletree at BSDA says this is not what is happening.
Is Appletree/DS being sidelined, meanwhile being assured by the new powers that be at 3ABN that he is actually continuing on as a valuable member of the administration of 3ABN?
I believe that I just read Appletree, the official 3ABN forums spokesperson, states that 3ABN is now negotiating a long-term contract with Danny Lee Shelton. If I were Danny Lee Shelton and I was at that last board meeting, I would be looking for a long-term contract as well...guess he forgot to get the golden parachute in writing before he resigned as President!!! Or did he and that is the problem??? Does 3ABN want to turn the gold into silver instead??? Or did Danny end up with fools gold???
By the way, one source told me that Danny just kinda showed up for the Live a week ago...rather impromptu according to the source. But was scheduled to do the Live this
last week and was not there. One source claimed he was sick and another said he was
un-invited. You choose the story...
We are also told that more than one member was not happy with the directon
of the board meeting and one was so upset he refused to shake Gilley's hand.
We are also told that Larry Ewing, the current CFO is so discouraged by the direction
of the ministry, and the ongoing IRS Criminal Investigation (yes he has admitted it is
a criminal investigation), he is preparing to leave 3ABN and go back to Canada. Seems
that after seven years they still have not sold the canadian homestead and Ewing has
the option to go home...but not far enough to reach beyond the powers of a US Attorney.
But then, don't you remember that Larry told us there is nothing wrong at 3ABN??? So why does he still have to chase down receipts for Danny's purchases???
Why is Danny still doing purchases??? Isn't he just a consultant??? Oh, that's right, we
are told that privilege was just taken away and Ewing is quite a bit behind. Must be old purchases. Wonder if Ewing will have them all documented before he leaves??? You better
bet we will be checking.
Sources also tell me that the payroll has been trimmed and some old "promoters" have been
demoted to unemployed, at least with 3ABN. Sources also tell us that they have also cut the budget for the "road crew" and they have few off campus production scheduled. Gilley was
in LA last Sabbath (February 2) preaching for Hyveth Williams but without his road crew.
The chairman has been quoted as saying "the Lord has Blessed them" but they have had to "tighten their belt", and are meeting expenses. Think Danny's long-term "love gift"
contract has much of a chance??? Danny must be very strapped as he recently told Linda
at their settlement conference that "he has no money" and Gilley re-affirmed that to a
former supporter. MUST BE THE TRUTH, right???
Danny did close several accounts in December of 2006, about the same time he was visiting Saint Croix. So, does anyone wonder what happened to that $300,000 plus from
the TCTR royalties and that $194,000 he had in his own royalty account? If Fjarli gifted the
mortgage and he had an increase in pay, did the cost of maintaining all those horses really
break him??? Sources tell me that is what he claims. Should Linda petition the court to sell
the horses to save Danny from imminent poverty? Maybe she could arrange a "private sale"!!!
Maybe Danny could arrange some more of those tax deductible gift receipts?? Maybe the IRS
will beat Linda to the property settlement!!!
Oh, here we go...I'll bet they will claim it is more lies, slander, libel and defamation...and it is postpetition too!!! And I here I have just filed bankruptcy and sold Bob down the river to take the heat all by himself...some people just don't know when to quit reporting the truth!!! :ROFL:
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUREPORTER
-
Well, as far as things being implemented since the last Board meeting, it continues to appear that Danny Shelton is actively being sidelined from public appearances with 3ABN.
Appletree at BSDA says this is not what is happening.
Is Appletree/DS being sidelined, meanwhile being assured by the new powers that be at 3ABN that he is actually continuing on as a valuable member of the administration of 3ABN?
I believe that I just read Appletree, the official 3ABN forums spokesperson, states that 3ABN is now negotiating a long-term contract with Danny Lee Shelton. If I were Danny Lee Shelton and I was at that last board meeting, I would be looking for a long-term contract as well...guess he forgot to get the golden parachute in writing before he resigned as President!!! Or did he and that is the problem??? Does 3ABN want to turn the gold into silver instead??? Or did Danny end up with fools gold???
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUREPORTER
Well, Danny/AT should know shouldn't he? Maybe, it's a case of he may still think he knows?
-
Gailon, you have provided a lot of really interesting information--is it actually true that Larry Ewing is leaving 3ABN and going back to Canada?
I thought he was in Colorado.
Also didn't know that he was the CFO. Is it correct that they will be choosing a new CFO?
-
Our information is that Ewing is leaving. If he leaves they will have to find a replacement. It will be a major project, but one that will speak volumes as
they prepare to replace his position.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Our information is that Ewing is leaving. If he leaves they will have to find a replacement. It will be a major project, but one that will speak volumes as
they prepare to replace his position.
Gailon Arthur Joy
A replacement for 3ABN CFO...
It seems like it would take either a very brave or very naive person to step into this position...
-
Here!!! Here!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Miracles do happen
-
Just to be sure that I am on the right track, does CFO mean Chief Financial Officer?
-
Daryl;
Yep, Yep, Yep.
This may break Danny's little heart! They may decide to hire an accountant. What a novel idea, huh?
Just what are the credentials of the past CFO. Would we be "really" impressed?
Could it be that he has become a scapegoat? Maybe he will have to take all the blame for not catching it; all this financial wrong doings might fall in his lap ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
-
This may break Danny's little heart! They may decide to hire an accountant. What a novel idea, huh?
Just what are the credentials of the past CFO. Would we be "really" impressed?
Could it be that he has become a scapegoat? Maybe he will have to take all the blame for not catching it; all this financial wrong doings might fall in his lap ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
That's an interesting thought, Fran!
Scapegoats are very popular in some institutional scenarios.
What were Larry Ewing's credentials, by the way?
-
This may break Danny's little heart! They may decide to hire an accountant. What a novel idea, huh?
Just what are the credentials of the past CFO. Would we be "really" impressed?
Could it be that he has become a scapegoat? Maybe he will have to take all the blame for not catching it; all this financial wrong doings might fall in his lap ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
That's an interesting thought, Fran!
Scapegoats are very popular in some institutional scenarios.
What were Larry Ewing's credentials, by the way?
Does Danny/3abn hire people with appropriate qualifications for the particular positions for which they want to fill? Or, are the more essential qualifications required: 1. being able to be manipulated, 2. will 'kowtow' to the boss and 3. they won't cause waves or see things that Danny/3abn don't want them to see?
-
I have had some conversations with a person who had that position in the past, who left because it was impossible to follow neither one's education nor conscience. That person was told to do things exactly according to the directions of Danny Shelton and Walt Thompson and not have any scruples about what is legal or not. This person therefore had to leave, just like Larry seems to be doing now - although I do not know why Larry is leaving. In my opinion he has a rather pleasant personality, but he has never been my boss.
-
"......and not have any scruples about what is legal or not" are strong words.
-
I have had some conversations with a person who had that position in the past, who left because it was impossible to follow neither one's education nor conscience. That person was told to do things exactly according to the directions of Danny Shelton and Walt Thompson and not have any scruples about what is legal or not. This person therefore had to leave, just like Larry seems to be doing now - although I do not know why Larry is leaving. In my opinion he has a rather pleasant personality, but he has never been my boss.
I have personally been in this situation and it's a terrible situation to be caught up in. But, one has to live with their conscience. Mind you, 'whistleblowers' get a really rough deal for the rest of their lives; whether that be in Church, Government or private enterprise. The idea is to destroy not just the person, but also their family. That's quite an emotional pull, to know that if one goes ahead with what they know is 'right', it can also destroy their family.This takes a lot of courage to stick with it. I can understand why many people do not follow through with 'blowing the whistle'.
-
"......and not have any scruples about what is legal or not" are strong words.
Strong words, but true words...Johann and I have the same understanding on this issue.
-
"......and not have any scruples about what is legal or not" are strong words.
In my experience, those words are absolutely true. Won't it be wonderful when we get to the Glory land and no longer have to live in situations where those words are so true and are more common than perhaps, many people would like to believe.
-
Is it ethical right to spend millions of dollars in an attempt of defaming those who question such things? Why not rather spend those funds improving and making open the current system?
-
Is it ethical right to spend millions of dollars in an attempt of defaming those who question such things? Why not rather spend those funds improving and making open the current system?
Because systems are about self preservation, not common sense, integrity and ethics. However, when whistleblowers stand up, frequently they find many others will stand with them and you develop the Enron affect: the "system" is brought to justice in time.
Someone just has to take that very first step...and you certainly know what that is all about, don't you, Johann...Linda has much to thank you for or we would not be where we are today without your efforts...too bad Linda doesn't recognize that and do us the justice of supporting the effort!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Is it ethical right to spend millions of dollars in an attempt of defaming those who question such things? Why not rather spend those funds improving and making open the current system?
Because systems are about self preservation, not common sense, integrity and ethics. However, when whistleblowers stand up, frequently they find many others will stand with them and you develop the Enron affect: the "system" is brought to justice in time.
Someone just has to take that very first step...and you certainly know what that is all about, don't you, Johann...Linda has much to thank you for or we would not be where we are today without your efforts...too bad Linda doesn't recognize that and do us the justice of supporting the effort!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Sabbath Blessings Gailon,
I don't really understand what you are saying here, but am trying to. So I hope you won't be offended or take it amiss if I ask you to clarify, and explain further what you mean exactly, when you say:
"...too bad Linda doesn't recognize that and do us the justice of supporting the effort!!!"
What exactly do you mean by "too bad Linda doesn't recognize that"? Linda doesn't recognize what? and what do you mean by "(Linda) doesn't do us the justice of supporting the effort"? And how exactly do you define "the effort"?
I would also appreciate hearing more about what you mean by this, and the same kind of clarifications and explanationes here:
"...Someone just has to take that very first step...and you certainly know what that is all about, don't you, Johann...Linda has much to thank you for or we would not be where we are today without your efforts..."
Thank you in advance for attempting to further the members and readers understanding here. :)
-- Just a doodle
-
Is it ethical right to spend millions of dollars in an attempt of defaming those who question such things? Why not rather spend those funds improving and making open the current system?
Because systems are about self preservation, not common sense, integrity and ethics. However, when whistleblowers stand up, frequently they find many others will stand with them and you develop the Enron affect: the "system" is brought to justice in time.
Someone just has to take that very first step...and you certainly know what that is all about, don't you, Johann...Linda has much to thank you for or we would not be where we are today without your efforts...too bad Linda doesn't recognize that and do us the justice of supporting the effort!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Blessings to you too Bro Johann, :)
If you don't mind, I would also like your response to what Joy posted, and in direct repsonse to what he posted, according to your personal understanding and view.
Thank you, as above it helps others to understand. :)
-- Doodle
-
Blessings to you too Bro Johann, Smiley
If you don't mind, I would also like your response to what Joy posted, and in direct repsonse to what he posted, according to your personal understanding and view.
Thank you, as above it helps others to understand. Smiley
-- Doodle
Hi Doodle Lee S
What was the question? ???
-
Is it ethical right to spend millions of dollars in an attempt of defaming those who question such things? Why not rather spend those funds improving and making open the current system?
Because systems are about self preservation, not common sense, integrity and ethics. However, when whistleblowers stand up, frequently they find many others will stand with them and you develop the Enron affect: the "system" is brought to justice in time.
Someone just has to take that very first step...and you certainly know what that is all about, don't you, Johann...Linda has much to thank you for or we would not be where we are today without your efforts...too bad Linda doesn't recognize that and do us the justice of supporting the effort!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Blessings to you too Bro Johann, :)
If you don't mind, I would also like your response to what Joy posted, and in direct repsonse to what he posted, according to your personal understanding and view.
Thank you, as above it helps others to understand. :)
-- Doodle
Johann,
Do you agree or not with GAJ's statement or not? A simple yes or no is sufficient.
-
And the "spectators" wait with baited breathe!!!
And what would give you the right to an answer?
Would the answer given be satisfactory?
I rather doubt it and now you are left to your speculation!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
And the "spectators" wait with baited breathe!!!
maybe they do, maybe they don't,
And what would give you the right to an answer?
uuuuhhh.....
Maybe the fact that you first brought it up here to the public, and people want to understand what you were referring to and what your meaning is, so they don't misjudge you or any other (Linda)?
Would the answer given be satisfactory?
Who knows? No ones heard it. You seem unable or unwilling to explain what you, yourself, have said and posted publicly. That naturally raises questions.
I rather doubt it and now you are left to your speculation!!!
Some questions are for clarification, because some don't like to specualte and prefer to be honest in their dealings, and unbiased in their search for all needed in order to make a educated, wise and informed judgment.
Giving anyone the benefit of the doubt is a good thing. Not doing so indicates what?
Are you a phychic in addition to all else you claim?
For the record, I am disapointed in your lack of a response to what was asked of you, and I cannot believe I am alone in that.
You injure yourself, and your own cause(?) here as far as I can tell.
-- Just a doodle
-
Johann,
Do you agree or not with GAJ's statement or not? A simple yes or no is sufficient.
Considering your previous outstanding contributions I'd be tempted to discover to what extend you are capable of spinning a "yes" and also to see your tremendous missiles launched to explode any "no" I'd muster. I must admit those wishes
evaporate as I consider the possibilities of experiencing your reactions to my refusal to given any reply to your question. You are a great artist and I look forward to watch your colorful verbal splattering on the Sheltonian horizon. My question is how much light and understanding they will reveal this time. :cat:
-
Blessings to you too Bro Johann, :)
If you don't mind, I would also like your response to what Joy posted, and in direct repsonse to what he posted, according to your personal understanding and view.
Thank you, as above it helps others to understand. :)
-- Doodle
Brother Doodle,
A reply demands a book. It may be available in the future for those who want to know, and the dismay of those who'd rather not.
-
Johann,
Do you agree or not with GAJ's statement or not? A simple yes or no is sufficient.
Considering your previous outstanding contributions I'd be tempted to discover to what extend you are capable of spinning a "yes" and also to see your tremendous missiles launched to explode any "no" I'd muster. I must admit those wishes evaporate as I consider the possibilities of experiencing your reactions to my refusal to given any reply to your question.
Blessings to you too Bro Johann, :)
If you don't mind, I would also like your response to what Joy posted, and in direct repsonse to what he posted, according to your personal understanding and view.
Thank you, as above it helps others to understand. :)
-- Doodle
Brother Doodle,
A reply demands a book. It may be available in the future for those who want to know, and the dismay of those who'd rather not.
Another psychic? or an alleged Christian who claims to know motives and intents?
Eithor, or? Doesn't matter, it's apparently accompanied by a refusal, and lack of willingness to answer honest questions.
:(
-- a disgusted doodle
-
Respectful discussion only please and thank you.
-
Because systems are about self preservation, not common sense, integrity and ethics. However, when whistleblowers stand up, frequently they find many others will stand with them and you develop the Enron affect: the "system" is brought to justice in time.
Someone just has to take that very first step...and you certainly know what that is all about, don't you, Johann...Linda has much to thank you for or we would not be where we are today without your efforts...too bad Linda doesn't recognize that and do us the justice of supporting the effort!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Okay, I notice that a couple other members have asked you for clarification on the meaning of your statement about Linda not supporting the effort for justice. Instead of a straight and transparent answer, which I thought was what we were striving for here, you and Johann are, instead, playing word games. Can we step aside from those for just a moment Gailon? Please?
I know you are under enormous pressure presently. You've got all that you are doing to meet the physical and financial demands of the law suit, you've got your bankruptcy case, and, per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated from your wife of many years. Those are all tremendous stressors. Now you are making it sound like you are being let down by Linda, that she is fighting against your efforts towards justice. Is this the case? Is this the message you are meaning to shout to the watching world? Nobody is trying to speculate, Gailon. At least I don't believe so from the questions that I have seen posted. It appears to me that there are some, probably many, who would simply would appreciate clarificaton for your huge statement about Linda so speculation can be nipped in the bud.
-
Because systems are about self preservation, not common sense, integrity and ethics. However, when whistleblowers stand up, frequently they find many others will stand with them and you develop the Enron affect: the "system" is brought to justice in time.
Someone just has to take that very first step...and you certainly know what that is all about, don't you, Johann...Linda has much to thank you for or we would not be where we are today without your efforts...too bad Linda doesn't recognize that and do us the justice of supporting the effort!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Okay, I notice that a couple other members have asked you for clarification on the meaning of your statement about Linda not supporting the effort for justice. Instead of a straight and transparent answer, which I thought was what we were striving for here, you and Johann are, instead, playing word games. Can we step aside from those for just a moment Gailon? Please?
I know you are under enormous pressure presently. You've got all that you are doing to meet the physical and financial demands of the law suit, you've got your bankruptcy case, and, per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated from your wife of many years. Those are all tremendous stressors. Now you are making it sound like you are being let down by Linda, that she is fighting against your efforts towards justice. Is this the case? Is this the message you are meaning to shout to the watching world? Nobody is trying to speculate, Gailon. At least I don't believe so from the questions that I have seen posted. It appears to me that there are some, probably many, who would simply would appreciate clarificaton for your huge statement about Linda so speculation can be nipped in the bud.
That is true as far as I can tell, and from my POV.
Thank you, for rephrasing and clarifying what I in my limitted manner tried to. :)
-
Another psychic? or an alleged Christian who claims to know motives and intents?
Eithor, or? Doesn't matter, it's apparently accompanied by a refusal, and lack of willingness to answer honest questions.
:(
-- a disgusted doodle
Dear disgusted doodle,
Only God can read motives and intends, so please do not refer to the psychic, which has no place in this discussion.
Since you seem to be new here, you may not have noticed how some of Danny defenders have twisted and spinned my words again and again, even more on BSDA, to make it very difficult for me to tell my story. They seem to be trying to plant a doubt in people's minds by questioning what I state as my personal experience in this matter.
I have given my story on a number of occasions, and this is what they seem to fear, that it will become public knowledge, and be accepted.
Much is at stake. This is why it will, in some cases, be more expedient I explain to the judge and jury what I have experienced, than to give a reply here where they have the possibility of sowing doubt and do some spinning of any reply I give to your honest question. A book seems unavoidable, to give the true story.
Whether disgusted or not, you are welcome here to doodle. Just make your doodling clear and distinct.
I will not reply to questions I feel are irrelevant at he moment, even though some are curious to know. If I feel the question is applicable right here and now, I will not hesitate. I am learning that many of the questions asked by some people here are not relevant and are asked in their attempt getting me out on weak limb where they think I will drop down. I can only tell you what I know from own experience, and not try to answer questions I have no way of knowing.
Gailon Arthur is doing his work completely independent of me. He has probably dug deep in things I know nothing about. So I cannot say yes or no to certain questions asked about what he says. That would be deception from my side. But those folks are trying to force a split between us by prying questions. Just don't you be one of them, and accept if I chose not to give an answer. The real hearing is not here on this net.
-
Well stated Pastor Johann.
-
Considering your previous outstanding contributions I'd be tempted to discover to what extend you are capable of spinning a "yes" and also to see your tremendous missiles launched to explode any "no" I'd muster. I must admit those wishes
evaporate as I consider the possibilities of experiencing your reactions to my refusal to given any reply to your question. You are a great artist and I look forward to watch your colorful verbal splattering on the Sheltonian horizon. My question is how much light and understanding they will reveal this time. :cat:
Johann,
I am tempted to merely reply with an "okey dokey." However, I would like to correct the impression you seem to have concerning my possible response to your non-answer so it is not necessary to speculate. I respect your right not to answer the question. My sincerest apology that I did not include that as an option in my post.
I am disappointed that you view any post of mine as spin or an attempt to do so as that has never been my agenda or intent. Clarification of what a poster has said but never spin as i try to objectively look at the various issues presented on these boards and the agendas and motivations that underlie every post whether subtle or seemingly hidden. I wish you well in your journey in these matters as I have never doubted your sincerity, loyalty and belief in the truth of what you personally experienced.
-
For the record, I am disapointed in your lack of a response to what was asked of you, and I cannot believe I am alone in that.
You injure yourself, and your own cause(?) here as far as I can tell.
-- Just a doodle
Respectfully, Doodle, I have asked many questions of the Dan Shelton supporters that have not been answered but instead are rebutted with ugly retorts. Do you think the potential for injury goes both ways?
-
Okay, I notice that a couple other members have asked you for clarification on the meaning of your statement about Linda not supporting the effort for justice. Instead of a straight and transparent answer, which I thought was what we were striving for here, you and Johann are, instead, playing word games. Can we step aside from those for just a moment Gailon? Please?
I know you are under enormous pressure presently. You've got all that you are doing to meet the physical and financial demands of the law suit, you've got your bankruptcy case, and, per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated from your wife of many years. Those are all tremendous stressors. Now you are making it sound like you are being let down by Linda, that she is fighting against your efforts towards justice. Is this the case? Is this the message you are meaning to shout to the watching world? Nobody is trying to speculate, Gailon. At least I don't believe so from the questions that I have seen posted. It appears to me that there are some, probably many, who would simply would appreciate clarificaton for your huge statement about Linda so speculation can be nipped in the bud.
Anyone who knows me, and you certainly know me well enough, knows that I am relatively immune to "stressors"...however, I was quite bemused by your declaration of my seperation from my wife
...but I got the biggest kick out of the many calls of "tongue in cheek" condolences!!! Unfortunately, My wife was not as amused and requested your contact information. I will spare you the indignity!!!
As to your query, why would you require a response from me? You have connections on both sides of the isle and could, and most probably have, most certainly found an answer to your inquiry.
As for myself, I have already gotten the response I was looking for...and if I had wanted to simply "give" you an answer, would I not have done so? THerefore, you are left to your own inquiry and discovery!!!
Tell us the conclusion to your query and we can all be enlightened. I already am bemused by your extrapolations...remember, we are at war...could it have been motivated by our frequent need of good intelligence???!!!
By the way, Grandma Nettie, if you go to Pacer for the Minnesotta case you will find exhibited the rest of the Miller documents that you have taken such exception to in the past. That and the other 31 exhibits are just a taste of what will be presented at trial, and why Miller is such an important "third party" to that process. Compare those letters to the letter that PB got from Miller that so perfectly defined him as an "adversarial witness". Then give me your take on his ethics and his integrity. Would you trust him with your religious freedoms? I grant you a sincere and honest Thank-you for your great service to us and to the Seventh-day Adventist Church... Keep up the great work!!!
https://ecf.mnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Gailon, please check your cited URL. It does not work.
-
You will notice that I edited Gailon's post, but that was only the formatting so that Grandma Nettie's post would show clearly.
I have also tried to take a look at the PACER website, and I don't get in. Hope we can get the right URL.
-
Gailon, please check your cited URL. It does not work.
One has to login to PACER and pull up the case before a link similar to that would work.
-
Okay, I notice that a couple other members have asked you for clarification on the meaning of your statement about Linda not supporting the effort for justice. Instead of a straight and transparent answer, which I thought was what we were striving for here, you and Johann are, instead, playing word games. Can we step aside from those for just a moment Gailon? Please?
I know you are under enormous pressure presently. You've got all that you are doing to meet the physical and financial demands of the law suit, you've got your bankruptcy case, and, per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated from your wife of many years. Those are all tremendous stressors. Now you are making it sound like you are being let down by Linda, that she is fighting against your efforts towards justice. Is this the case? Is this the message you are meaning to shout to the watching world? Nobody is trying to speculate, Gailon. At least I don't believe so from the questions that I have seen posted. It appears to me that there are some, probably many, who would simply would appreciate clarificaton for your huge statement about Linda so speculation can be nipped in the bud.
Anyone who knows me, and you certainly know me well enough, knows that I am relatively immune to "stressors"...however, I was quite bemused by your declaration of my seperation from my wife
...but I got the biggest kick out of the many calls of "tongue in cheek" condolences!!! Unfortunately, My wife was not as amused and requested your contact information. I will spare you the indignity!!!
Yes, I have gotten to know you quite well over the last 1.5 years. I have clearly seen how you have treated those who you feel are questioning your actions in this investigation. It is why I have chosen to have little further communication with you. I have made exceptions recently and your statement against Linda Shelton drew another out of me. I did attempt to find an answer behind the scenes but was less than successful.
I have bolded and highlighted in red the preface to my statement about your legal separation from your wife. It was not an assumption or an extrapolation. I read it in black and white in court documents over a month ago.
You and others can find the document in question, GJBankdoc5081407.pdf(40.08k) in fallible humanbeing's post of January 22, 2008. (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=14245&view=findpost&p=233949)
"Part II. CALCULATION OF MONTHLY INCOME.... " has the box by b checked which states:
b. Married, not filing jointly with declaration of separate households. By checking this box, debtor declares under penalty of perjury: "My spouse and I are leagally separated under applicable non-bankruptcy law or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpost of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." Complete only column A ("Debtor's Income") for Lines 3-11.
As to your query, why would you require a response from me? You have connections on both sides of the isle and could, and most probably have, most certainly found an answer to your inquiry.
As for myself, I have already gotten the response I was looking for...and if I had wanted to simply "give" you an answer, would I not have done so? THerefore, you are left to your own inquiry and discovery!!!
Tell us the conclusion to your query and we can all be enlightened. I already am bemused by your extrapolations...remember, we are at war...could it have been motivated by our frequent need of good intelligence???!!!
By the way, Grandma Nettie, if you go to Pacer for the Minnesotta case you will find exhibited the rest of the Miller documents that you have taken such exception to in the past. That and the other 31 exhibits are just a taste of what will be presented at trial, and why Miller is such an important "third party" to that process. Compare those letters to the letter that PB got from Miller that so perfectly defined him as an "adversarial witness". Then give me your take on his ethics and his integrity. Would you trust him with your religious freedoms? I grant you a sincere and honest Thank-you for your great service to us and to the Seventh-day Adventist Church... Keep up the great work!!!
https://ecf.mnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt
Gailon Arthur Joy
I queried you about the statement against Linda's lack of support because you are the one who made it. I do not require an answer but I hoped for one so I could understand the reasoning behind your statement about Linda's lack of support of the cause. How would any of my "contacts on both sides of the aisle"(I take it you are referring to my friend FHB who trades nature photographs, music, anecdotes about parenting with me, discusses current world and political events with me, and who doesn't see eye to eye with me on this 3abn situation but sometimes we discuss it anyway?) know what was in your mind that was the motivation for your statement. The person I approached, one firmly on your side of the aisle, urged me to ask you, so I did.
As for the rest of your statement, if you are comfortable demonstrating to all readers how you are gleefully willing to use and manipulate people to reach your goals that is fine by me. I don't feel used because I wasn't. Had you asked me directly to contact Nick Miller to ask his permission to post his email before it met all of the conditions for posting, I would have been happy to do so. If you needed to use a form of trickery to ascertain that he was an adversarial witness, I'm happy that I could oblige because it also made it a bit more clear to me who you are and what you are willing to do in your pursuit of information. I guess that makes it a win-win situation.
If Mrs. Joy still wishes to contact me, please feel free to allow her to do so. I will be happy to read the document to her over the phone so she can understand why I made the statement I did.
Jeanette
-
I make no pretense of being one who has any great understanding of things legal, but I can see that my stating "per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated" was potentially inaccurate since choice "b" also states "or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." I should have not included "legally" in my statement.
Either way, legally separated or living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of the bankruptcy code, isn't the point of checking box "b" to show that the married couple is separated and that the other spouse's income should not be considered in the bankruptcy case because of that separation?
If the separate living quarters is just a case of personal preference, like Woody Allen and Mia Farrow lived for years, that would not preclude the income of Mrs. Joy from being considered in the bankruptcy, would it?
-
I make no pretense of being one who has any great understanding of things legal, but I can see that my stating "per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated" was potentially inaccurate since choice "b" also states "or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." I should have not included "legally" in my statement.
Either way, legally separated or living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of the bankruptcy code, isn't the point of checking box "b" to show that the married couple is separated and that the other spouse's income should not be considered in the bankruptcy case because of that separation?
If the separate living quarters is just a case of personal preference, like Woody Allen and Mia Farrow lived for years, that would not preclude the income of Mrs. Joy from being considered in the bankruptcy, would it?
Jeannette,
I have been trying very hard to refrain from responding to this last series of posts, but I find myself being overcome by disappointment. Knowing you as well as I thought I did, I fail to see the point in your bringing this information here at all with the exception of casting aspersions on him and satisfying a certain amount of vindictiveness... What on earth does Mr. Joy's marital status have to do with anything that you are trying to accomplish??
Ducking and running but still sad,
Snoopy
-
I make no pretense of being one who has any great understanding of things legal, but I can see that my stating "per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated" was potentially inaccurate since choice "b" also states "or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." I should have not included "legally" in my statement.
Either way, legally separated or living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of the bankruptcy code, isn't the point of checking box "b" to show that the married couple is separated and that the other spouse's income should not be considered in the bankruptcy case because of that separation?
If the separate living quarters is just a case of personal preference, like Woody Allen and Mia Farrow lived for years, that would not preclude the income of Mrs. Joy from being considered in the bankruptcy, would it?
Jeannette,
I have been trying very hard to refrain from responding to this last series of posts, but I find myself being overcome by disappointment. Knowing you as well as I thought I did, I fail to see the point in your bringing this information here at all with the exception of casting aspersions on him and satisfying a certain amount of vindictiveness... What on earth does Mr. Joy's marital status have to do with anything that you are trying to accomplish??
Ducking and running but still sad,
Snoopy
You know I adore you, Snoopy, and you do know me as well as you thought you did. I hate to feel that I have disappointed anyone because I am human and relish affirmation and acceptance, but you know you would be disappointed with me if I didn't speak my mind here and there, if I didn't continue to search for truth and understanding.
What was I trying to accomplish? I was trying to understand why Gailon made that statement against Linda. As I said in my post to him, I can imagine the pressure he is under and then I had the bankruptcy document that had the "b" in Section II checked showing that he and his wife of so many years were separated. All of these factors made me wonder if he had gotten so frustrated by all of the pressures that, perhaps, he was showing some of the frustration here when he was expressing his displeasure about Linda not supporting the cause. His statement against Linda shocked me, Snoopy. I didn't want to jump to conclusions so I tried to find out what the story was. As I said, my behind the scenes attempts failed and the person I was discussing this with suggested it would be best to ask Gailon, so I did.
-
I make no pretense of being one who has any great understanding of things legal, but I can see that my stating "per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated" was potentially inaccurate since choice "b" also states "or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." I should have not included "legally" in my statement.
Either way, legally separated or living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of the bankruptcy code, isn't the point of checking box "b" to show that the married couple is separated and that the other spouse's income should not be considered in the bankruptcy case because of that separation?
If the separate living quarters is just a case of personal preference, like Woody Allen and Mia Farrow lived for years, that would not preclude the income of Mrs. Joy from being considered in the bankruptcy, would it?
Jeannette,
I have been trying very hard to refrain from responding to this last series of posts, but I find myself being overcome by disappointment. Knowing you as well as I thought I did, I fail to see the point in your bringing this information here at all with the exception of casting aspersions on him and satisfying a certain amount of vindictiveness... What on earth does Mr. Joy's marital status have to do with anything that you are trying to accomplish??
Ducking and running but still sad,
Snoopy
You know I adore you, Snoopy, and you do know me as well as you thought you did. I hate to feel that I have disappointed anyone because I am human and relish affirmation and acceptance, but you know you would be disappointed with me if I didn't speak my mind here and there, if I didn't continue to search for truth and understanding.
What was I trying to accomplish? I was trying to understand why Gailon made that statement against Linda. As I said in my post to him, I can imagine the pressure he is under and then I had the bankruptcy document that had the "b" in Section II checked showing that he and his wife of so many years were separated. All of these factors made me wonder if he had gotten so frustrated by all of the pressures that, perhaps, he was showing some of the frustration here when he was expressing his displeasure about Linda not supporting the cause. His statement against Linda shocked me, Snoopy. I didn't want to jump to conclusions so I tried to find out what the story was. As I said, my behind the scenes attempts failed and the person I was discussing this with suggested it would be best to ask Gailon, so I did.
Yes, you surely did. On a public forum. If you were truly concerned, why not call or send an email or a PM? Was this response from Ian a part of what you hoped to accomplish?? (This was the post that was there at around 2pm PST) I really don't get what you are trying to do, but maybe that's just me :dunno:
****************************************
Per Ian at BSDA:
The rather interesting conversation I quote below took place on AT in reference to the first document posted above.
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s...st&p=233949
(I added the blue font below to highlight the part with relevance to this topic)
Has Gailon lied and (or) committed perjury in his Bankruptcy case???
-
Jeanette,
Since it is obvious that you would know how to contact Gailon privately, from comments that have passed between you and he on AT, I also wonder what was your motive in posting this publically and not contacting him privately? Your explanation is definitely eroding your credibility:
I didn't want to jump to conclusions so I tried to find out what the story was. As I said, my behind the scenes attempts failed and the person I was discussing this with suggested it would be best to ask Gailon, so I did.
If you are really looking for the truth, Jeanette, I would suggest you always go first privately to the source, not relying on third or fourth hand information. I now understand how you have been so easily mislead by Appletree, Ian/Cindy and other unscrupulous individuals.
Sister
-
I make no pretense of being one who has any great understanding of things legal, but I can see that my stating "per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated" was potentially inaccurate since choice "b" also states "or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." I should have not included "legally" in my statement.
Either way, legally separated or living apart other than for the purpose of evading the requirements of the bankruptcy code, isn't the point of checking box "b" to show that the married couple is separated and that the other spouse's income should not be considered in the bankruptcy case because of that separation?
If the separate living quarters is just a case of personal preference, like Woody Allen and Mia Farrow lived for years, that would not preclude the income of Mrs. Joy from being considered in the bankruptcy, would it?
Jeannette,
I have been trying very hard to refrain from responding to this last series of posts, but I find myself being overcome by disappointment. Knowing you as well as I thought I did, I fail to see the point in your bringing this information here at all with the exception of casting aspersions on him and satisfying a certain amount of vindictiveness... What on earth does Mr. Joy's marital status have to do with anything that you are trying to accomplish??
Ducking and running but still sad,
Snoopy
You know I adore you, Snoopy, and you do know me as well as you thought you did. I hate to feel that I have disappointed anyone because I am human and relish affirmation and acceptance, but you know you would be disappointed with me if I didn't speak my mind here and there, if I didn't continue to search for truth and understanding.
What was I trying to accomplish? I was trying to understand why Gailon made that statement against Linda. As I said in my post to him, I can imagine the pressure he is under and then I had the bankruptcy document that had the "b" in Section II checked showing that he and his wife of so many years were separated. All of these factors made me wonder if he had gotten so frustrated by all of the pressures that, perhaps, he was showing some of the frustration here when he was expressing his displeasure about Linda not supporting the cause. His statement against Linda shocked me, Snoopy. I didn't want to jump to conclusions so I tried to find out what the story was. As I said, my behind the scenes attempts failed and the person I was discussing this with suggested it would be best to ask Gailon, so I did.
Yes, you surely did. On a public forum. If you were truly concerned, why not call or send an email or a PM? Was this response from Ian a part of what you hoped to accomplish?? (This was the post that was there at around 2pm PST) I really don't get what you are trying to do, but maybe that's just me :dunno:
****************************************
Per Ian at BSDA:
The rather interesting conversation I quote below took place on AT in reference to the first document posted above.
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s...st&p=233949
(I added the blue font below to highlight the part with relevance to this topic)
Has Gailon lied and (or) committed perjury in his Bankruptcy case???
Snoopy, what I was trying to accomplish was to find out why Gailon made the statement he did about Linda. I asked him about it on this public forum because two other members had also asked here. It was already a matter of discussion. Were there only three members here who were surprised by the statement about Linda not supporting the cause?
It didn't help clarify things for Gailon to post the following:
And the "spectators" wait with baited breathe!!!
And what would give you the right to an answer?
Would the answer given be satisfactory?
I rather doubt it and now you are left to your speculation!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
I was saddened to read in the bankruptcy document that Gailon and his wife were separated. I had heard they were trying to work things out from an individual that came into BSDA LC and went on and on about Gailon's church. I have since deemed that individual unreliable due to information I received from Bob Pickle when he called me for assistance in another matter . I figured this might be adding to the stressors he was under with everything else. Since their marital status was an unchanged matter of public record per the bankruptcy document, I thought it was likely Mr. and Mrs. Joy were still separated.
When I asked the questions about the statement against Linda and replied to Gailon's surprising answer did I know that Ian would see Gailon's response about their marital status and decide to post a link to it on BSDA? Absolutely not. I was doing what I always do; looking for clarification and understanding and truth.
-
Jeanette,
Since it is obvious that you would know how to contact Gailon privately, from comments that have passed between you and he on AT, I also wonder what was your motive in posting this publically and not contacting him privately? Your explanation is definitely eroding your credibility:
I didn't want to jump to conclusions so I tried to find out what the story was. As I said, my behind the scenes attempts failed and the person I was discussing this with suggested it would be best to ask Gailon, so I did.
If you are really looking for the truth, Jeanette, I would suggest you always go first privately to the source, not relying on third or fourth hand information. I now understand how you have been so easily mislead by Appletree, Ian/Cindy and other unscrupulous individuals.
Sister
Sister
From recent experience I expect the same results from my attempts to privately ask Gailon for information as I recently received from you when I privately asked for information. Do you honestly think that Gailon would be any more forthcoming than you were?
I will repeat what I said to Snoopy. I did attempt to obtain the information from someone closely associated with Gailon but she told me to ask him. I came back here and asked publically because Gailon made his statement about Linda publically and two other members publically asked questions about the post. I was participating in a forum discussion just like any other member.
Jeanette
-
[Quote/]
I was saddened to read in the bankruptcy document that Gailon and his wife were separated. I had heard they were trying to work things out from an individual that came into BSDA LC and went on and on about Gailon's church. I have since deemed that individual unreliable due to information I received from Bob Pickle when he called me for assistance in another matter . I figured this might be adding to the stressors he was under with everything else. Since their marital status was an unchanged matter of public record per the bankruptcy document, I thought it was likely Mr. and Mrs. Joy were still separated.
When I asked the questions about the statement against Linda and replied to Gailon's surprising answer did I know that Ian would see Gailon's response about their marital status and decide to post a link to it on BSDA? Absolutely not. I was doing what I always do; looking for clarification and understanding and truth.
[/quote]
And I do not blame you. Frankly, I had no idea the wrong box was checked on the ECF Filing with the Bankruptcy Court. THe proper check and the one that is checked in my original document was letter C: "Married, not filing jointly, without the declaration of seperate households. Spouse income is included in CMI but not DMI." SInce Mrs Joy did not have any income in 2007 it was not a material issue, but certainly could be confusing to those who did not know the difference.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I was saddened to read in the bankruptcy document that Gailon and his wife were separated. I had heard they were trying to work things out from an individual that came into BSDA LC and went on and on about Gailon's church. I have since deemed that individual unreliable due to information I received from Bob Pickle when he called me for assistance in another matter . I figured this might be adding to the stressors he was under with everything else. Since their marital status was an unchanged matter of public record per the bankruptcy document, I thought it was likely Mr. and Mrs. Joy were still separated.
When I asked the questions about the statement against Linda and replied to Gailon's surprising answer did I know that Ian would see Gailon's response about their marital status and decide to post a link to it on BSDA? Absolutely not. I was doing what I always do; looking for clarification and understanding and truth.
And I do not blame you. Frankly, I had no idea the wrong box was checked on the ECF Filing with the Bankruptcy Court. THe proper check and the one that is checked in my original document was letter C: "Married, not filing jointly, without the declaration of seperate households. Spouse income is included in CMI but not DMI." SInce Mrs Joy did not have any income in 2007 it was not a material issue, but certainly could be confusing to those who did not know the difference.
Gailon Arthur Joy
I'm relieved this was just a mistake, Gailon. So, Mrs. Joy and I are okay now?
Is this document something that you will have to repair so there aren't judicial repercussions?
Any possibility we can get an explanation for your statement about Linda not supporting the cause?
-
And I do not blame you. Frankly, I had no idea the wrong box was checked on the ECF Filing with the Bankruptcy Court. THe proper check and the one that is checked in my original document was letter C: "Married, not filing jointly, without the declaration of seperate households. Spouse income is included in CMI but not DMI." SInce Mrs Joy did not have any income in 2007 it was not a material issue, but certainly could be confusing to those who did not know the difference.
Gailon Arthur Joy
While I hope it was a mistake, I have some concerns.
I apologise for that, but I am somewhat acquainted with bankruptcy laws and forms, and having read the document referred to in the link above, and now your explanation, it simply doesn't add up.
My reasons for saying this are because in the same means test in the next section, you are required to list your household size and include all dependants. According to what you say above, your wife would be one.
In section 3 you list your household size as 1, which might be a mistake also, but seems unlikely as you go one to list the required amount based on that number, which has to be looked up.
You lose an exemption that way, so it seems it would not be to your advantage to do this, but the reason for this form is also to make sure you have listed all assets, and I'm sure you must know that by filing married but separate households, you don't have to do so.
I am sure you understand that doesn't look right, and will move to correct this as soon as possible to avoid the appearance of evil as well as avoid possible legal penalties or consequences.
Just a doodle
-
Next time I need a stay from creditors, I shall send it to you to do...maybe, just maybe, it would get done correctly. Beyond that, you will have to take up your issues with counsel.
I can assure you, that the means test was not a problem by that time. But speculate as you will. It will get you virtually no-where.
Given the direction of financial markets, it will be some time before it would be an issue. But, then again, who would believe we had any value in "Save3ABN.com"? If I had known that, I would have proposed an auction on E-bay!!! The webmaster would have been elated!!!
But, then, one wonders why the trustee opted for a private sale vs an auction? That is a far more interesting question...and just how many lawyers will be at the feeding trough for the measely $5,000 she was offered?
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I'm relieved this was just a mistake, Gailon. So, Mrs. Joy and I are okay now?
Is this document something that you will have to repair so there aren't judicial repercussions?
Any possibility we can get an explanation for your statement about Linda not supporting the cause?
Mrs Joy is now livid!!! But not with you...sometimes you cannot win for losing. C'est la vie!!!
I am sorry to see your sources have failed you. Believe me, I understand the frustration. Run into it all the time. Don't we, Bob???
As to the The Linda Mystery, it is simple enough...she had been asked to do some research and get the information back to us and it was not forth-coming, not to mention she seemed to be non-responsive to communication efforts. Following my post, I did speak with her and discovered she had completed the research and had given the package to another to deliver...it has now gone into a bottomless pit that seems to be an ever increasing problem for us. It will be available in time. Just a matter of how much effort it will take to get it out. Again, C'est la vie!!!
It is that simple!!! Satisfied??? I would think not, but the rest will be speculative fun!!!
Oh, yeah...the other news...the accountant for DLS, D&L and DLS Publishing seems to have misplaced the 2004 tax returns, I am told. Any speculation why?
Gailon Arthur Joy
=======
Quote formatting problem corrected. - Daryl :)
-
Thank you for the explanation as to Linda's alleged lack of support, Gailon. Hopefully we can now put that to rest!!
I believe I have a fairly good idea as to whom Mrs. Joy's ire is now directed!! She must be a real trooper to put up with all of this!!
And aren't accountants supposed to be organized? How could they "misplace" a tax return, especially if they filed it? No back-up tapes? If they really wanted to, couldn't the accountant request the returns from the IRS? Any remote chance this is the same accountant used by 3ABN?
-
Thank you for the explanation as to Linda's alleged lack of support, Gailon. Hopefully we can now put that to rest!!
I believe I have a fairly good idea as to whom Mrs. Joy's ire is now directed!! She must be a real trooper to put up with all of this!!
And aren't accountants supposed to be organized? How could they "misplace" a tax return, especially if they filed it? No back-up tapes? If they really wanted to, couldn't the accountant request the returns from the IRS? Any remote chance this is the same accountant used by 3ABN?
How astute...yes, the accountant is the one and the same. We have an issue here. Judge Saylor penned a decision that was upheld by the First Circuit Court of appeals clarifying that Accountants do not have privilege in the Federal Court system. After we finish in Minnesotta and deal with the 3ABN Motion for Protective Order in Massachusetts we have to turn our attention back to Illinois. Yet another front that needs a little subpoena enforcement motion. And don't forget Michigan.
ANd on and on as we move to build our case against 3ABN and Danny Lee Shelton!!! We move steadilly but assuredly forward as we prepare for a trial on the merits!!!
Time and fortitude and the evidence will all come together with a clear picture...add a little testimony from actual witnesses and we will get our Jury Verdict.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Snoppy
RE:"Has Gailon lied and (or) committed perjury in his Bankruptcy case???"
FWIW......whatever Gailons personal issues are, has NOTHING to do with the issue of Danny and Linda, and the pictillows of financial aberrant behavior at 3SABN.
Wither one likes or dislikes Gailon, wither one believes or disbelieves his story about Linda/Danny and 3ABN......his personal life, financial issues and relationships with his family has NOTHING to do with the issues at hand.... An attack such as seen above on Gailon is simply an Ad Homenion attack.....since those who appear to attack him can't demonstrate any real response the FACTS about 3ABN he's presented!
-
Next time I need a stay from creditors, I shall send it to you to do...maybe, just maybe, it would get done correctly. Beyond that, you will have to take up your issues with counsel.
I can assure you, that the means test was not a problem by that time. But speculate as you will. It will get you virtually no-where.
Given the direction of financial markets, it will be some time before it would be an issue. But, then again, who would believe we had any value in "Save3ABN.com"? If I had known that, I would have proposed an auction on E-bay!!! The webmaster would have been elated!!!
But, then, one wonders why the trustee opted for a private sale vs an auction? That is a far more interesting question...and just how many lawyers will be at the feeding trough for the measely $5,000 she was offered?
Gailon Arthur Joy
I'm sorry but I have no idea what this has to do with the previous posts, the issue being discussed, or what you even mean.
And although it is a reply, it seems unresponsive to me.
If I were involved I would be requesting permission from the court to examine you and all your claims, and (or) to depose you, as that would seem to me to be the next logical steps.
Beyond that I refuse to speculate, or surmise.
Just a Doodle
edit reason: added further explanation to above post.
-
After we finish in Minnesotta and deal with the 3ABN Motion for Protective Order in Massachusetts we have to turn our attention back to Illinois. Yet another front that needs a little subpoena enforcement motion. And don't forget Michigan.
ANd on and on as we move to build our case against 3ABN and Danny Lee Shelton!!! We move steadilly but assuredly forward as we prepare for a trial on the merits!!!
Time and fortitude and the evidence will all come together with a clear picture...add a little testimony from actual witnesses and we will get our Jury Verdict.
Gailon Arthur Joy
???
May I quote from another document quoted on BSDA, one filed in answer to Bob Pickle's document, which was quoted both here, and there?
"Plaintiff is not a criminal defendant, Defendant is not a governmental actor"
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=20348&view=findpost&p=238869
Just a Doodle
-
Oh, yeah...the other news...the accountant for DLS, D&L and DLS Publishing seems to have misplaced the 2004 tax returns, I am told. Any speculation why?
If you're talking about misplacing Linda's tax return for 2004, they didn't do that one. If you're talking about misplacing DLS and DLS Publishing's returns, I doubt they've misplaced those.
Am I incorrect?
-
I know you are under enormous pressure presently. You've got all that you are doing to meet the physical and financial demands of the law suit, you've got your bankruptcy case, and, per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated from your wife of many years. Those are all tremendous stressors. Now you are making it sound like you are being let down by Linda, that she is fighting against your efforts towards justice. Is this the case? Is this the message you are meaning to shout to the watching world? Nobody is trying to speculate, Gailon. At least I don't believe so from the questions that I have seen posted. It appears to me that there are some, probably many, who would simply would appreciate clarificaton for your huge statement about Linda so speculation can be nipped in the bud.
Anyone who knows me, and you certainly know me well enough, knows that I am relatively immune to "stressors"...however, I was quite bemused by your declaration of my seperation from my wife
...but I got the biggest kick out of the many calls of "tongue in cheek" condolences!!! Unfortunately, My wife was not as amused and requested your contact information. I will spare you the indignity!!!
Yes, I have gotten to know you quite well over the last 1.5 years. I have clearly seen how you have treated those who you feel are questioning your actions in this investigation. It is why I have chosen to have little further communication with you.
I have bolded and highlighted in red the preface to my statement about your legal separation from your wife. It was not an assumption or an extrapolation. I read it in black and white in court documents over a month ago.
You and others can find the document in question, GJBankdoc5081407.pdf(40.08k) in fallible humanbeing's post of January 22, 2008. (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=14245&view=findpost&p=233949)
"Part II. CALCULATION OF MONTHLY INCOME.... " has the box by b checked which states:
b. Married, not filing jointly with declaration of separate households. By checking this box, debtor declares under penalty of perjury: "My spouse and I are leagally separated under applicable non-bankruptcy law or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpost of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." Complete only column A ("Debtor's Income") for Lines 3-11.
Reading this gave me the opportunity for quite a lot of mirth, and then I started wondering what people might be thinking about my husband (of 48 years) and myself. :scratch: As we are legally classified as being 'separated' - my husband lives next door to me, I wondered what 'spin' people might put on that situation? Just as well we both have a sense of humour. Just goes to show how people can misinterpret situations, if they want to see things in a bad light. :ROFL:
-
[/b]
I know you are under enormous pressure presently. You've got all that you are doing to meet the physical and financial demands of the law suit, you've got your bankruptcy case, and, per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated from your wife of many years. Those are all tremendous stressors. Now you are making it sound like you are being let down by Linda, that she is fighting against your efforts towards justice. Is this the case? Is this the message you are meaning to shout to the watching world? Nobody is trying to speculate, Gailon. At least I don't believe so from the questions that I have seen posted. It appears to me that there are some, probably many, who would simply would appreciate clarificaton for your huge statement about Linda so speculation can be nipped in the bud.
[/b]
Anyone who knows me, and you certainly know me well enough, knows that I am relatively immune to "stressors"...however, I was quite bemused by your declaration of my seperation from my wife
...but I got the biggest kick out of the many calls of "tongue in cheek" condolences!!! Unfortunately, My wife was not as amused and requested your contact information. I will spare you the indignity!!!
Yes, I have gotten to know you quite well over the last 1.5 years. I have clearly seen how you have treated those who you feel are questioning your actions in this investigation. It is why I have chosen to have little further communication with you.
I have bolded and highlighted in red the preface to my statement about your legal separation from your wife. It was not an assumption or an extrapolation. I read it in black and white in court documents over a month ago.
You and others can find the document in question, GJBankdoc5081407.pdf(40.08k) in fallible humanbeing's post of January 22, 2008. (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=14245&view=findpost&p=233949)
"Part II. CALCULATION OF MONTHLY INCOME.... " has the box by b checked which states:
b. Married, not filing jointly with declaration of separate households. By checking this box, debtor declares under penalty of perjury: "My spouse and I are leagally separated under applicable non-bankruptcy law or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpost of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." Complete only column A ("Debtor's Income") for Lines 3-11.
Reading this gave me the opportunity for quite a lot of mirth, and then I started wondering what people might be thinking about my husband (of 48 years) and myself. :scratch: As we are legally classified as being 'separated' - my husband lives next door to me, I wondered what 'spin' people might put on that situation? Just as well we both have a sense of humour. Just goes to show how people can misinterpret situations, if they want to see things in a bad light. :ROFL:
AMEN! People never surprise me anymore. To me, this was not right - for many reasons. IMO, it was in bad taste.
I am still "mirthing" over those series of posts. As soon as I am finished "mirthing", I plan to post something. It was troubling to see how those series of posts went - no, disturbing. I know some of you know what I mean. Hopefully I can put it into constructive words (when I am done mirthing, that is - I like that word!)) and address it, since I was the one that GrandmaNettie asked behind the scenes for information, and I directed her to Gailon. That is how I do things, and I felt that was the way to go. Obviously she didn't take my advice.
-
After we finish in Minnesotta and deal with the 3ABN Motion for Protective Order in Massachusetts we have to turn our attention back to Illinois. Yet another front that needs a little subpoena enforcement motion. And don't forget Michigan.
ANd on and on as we move to build our case against 3ABN and Danny Lee Shelton!!! We move steadilly but assuredly forward as we prepare for a trial on the merits!!!
Time and fortitude and the evidence will all come together with a clear picture...add a little testimony from actual witnesses and we will get our Jury Verdict.
Gailon Arthur Joy
???
May I quote from another document quoted on BSDA, one filed in answer to Bob Pickle's document, which was quoted both here, and there?
"Plaintiff is not a criminal defendant, Defendant is not a governmental actor"
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=20348&view=findpost&p=238869
Just a Doodle
And your point is...??? Are we to suppose assume that just because the plaintiffs counsel says it, it is the law? In fact, as I stated, the 8th District has already spoken and it was a Minnesotta case that summarizes simply that Minnesotta has no jurisdiction to determine the claims of privilege and motions for protective order; they can only issue a stay pending the decision of the juridictional decision of the underlying case. Or enforce the subpoena.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
By the way, Doodle, ever give thought to the implications of a qui tam claim???
Yes that is the one where you can become a private attorney general and take the role of the government. I am sure counsel is aware of the concept.
Regardless, there is plenty of support for the premise that those docs are essential to our case and the First District, the jurisdictional district, seems to support the concept of limited privilege and limited privacy. Just take a look at the local rules and decision that follow them.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Reading this gave me the opportunity for quite a lot of mirth, and then I started wondering what people might be thinking about my husband (of 48 years) and myself. :scratch: As we are legally classified as being 'separated' - my husband lives next door to me, I wondered what 'spin' people might put on that situation? Just as well we both have a sense of humour. Just goes to show how people can misinterpret situations, if they want to see things in a bad light. :ROFL:
Ozzie, apparently you responded to Gailon and my posts before you read further in the thread and discovered the post where Gailon states he didn't know that the bankruptcy document had him listed as separated from his wife.
And I do not blame you. Frankly, I had no idea the wrong box was checked on the ECF Filing with the Bankruptcy Court. THe proper check and the one that is checked in my original document was letter C: "Married, not filing jointly, without the declaration of seperate households. Spouse income is included in CMI but not DMI." SInce Mrs Joy did not have any income in 2007 it was not a material issue, but certainly could be confusing to those who did not know the difference.
Gailon Arthur Joy
He was no longer "bemused" and Mrs. Joy had reached "livid" status, but no longer at me.
I'm relieved this was just a mistake, Gailon. So, Mrs. Joy and I are okay now?
Is this document something that you will have to repair so there aren't judicial repercussions?
Any possibility we can get an explanation for your statement about Linda not supporting the cause?
Mrs Joy is now livid!!! But not with you...sometimes you cannot win for losing. C'est la vie!!!
I am sorry to see your sources have failed you. Believe me, I understand the frustration. Run into it all the time. Don't we, Bob???
As to the The Linda Mystery, it is simple enough...she had been asked to do some research and get the information back to us and it was not forth-coming, not to mention she seemed to be non-responsive to communication efforts. Following my post, I did speak with her and discovered she had completed the research and had given the package to another to deliver...it has now gone into a bottomless pit that seems to be an ever increasing problem for us. It will be available in time. Just a matter of how much effort it will take to get it out. Again, C'est la vie!!!
It is that simple!!! Satisfied??? I would think not, but the rest will be speculative fun!!!
Oh, yeah...the other news...the accountant for DLS, D&L and DLS Publishing seems to have misplaced the 2004 tax returns, I am told. Any speculation why?
Gailon Arthur Joy
=======
Quote formatting problem corrected. - Daryl :)
Once Gailon posted his explanations, I ceased from further discussion on the matter. I note that both Snoopy and Sister ceased from their challenges of the intent in my original post, as well. It appeared to me that this matter was settled. I trust it will be for you once you catch up with the other posts.
Jeanette
-
AMEN! People never surprise me anymore. To me, this was not right - for many reasons. IMO, it was in bad taste.
I am still "mirthing" over those series of posts. As soon as I am finished "mirthing", I plan to post something. It was troubling to see how those series of posts went - no, disturbing. I know some of you know what I mean. Hopefully I can put it into constructive words (when I am done mirthing, that is - I like that word!)) and address it, since I was the one that GrandmaNettie asked behind the scenes for information, and I directed her to Gailon. That is how I do things, and I felt that was the way to go. Obviously she didn't take my advice.
Do you believe Gailon is still "mirthing"? Or Mrs. Joy? Yes, I approached you... both by email and IM to try to privately get the information on why both Bob and Gailon seemed to be posting negative statements against Linda all of the sudden. Why would I approach you? Because I care deeply about Linda's welfare and it appeared there was a level of acrimony developing against her. Because you are in constant contact with both Linda and Gailon and in the past have been completely willing to provide clarification when needed. I have operated in that same capacity for Bob and Gailon in the past when they have needed clarification but have not been able, for whatever reason, to approach a source directly.
Obviously I did take it to Gailon just a few hours after you and I IMd from 8:58am to 11:27am on February 24th. Gailon's statement was made publically. The matter was already being address publically. And you are well aware of why I choose not to approach Gailon privately any longer.
-
In defense of GrandmaNettie, she based what she thought on what were supposed to be official documents. What else was she to think?
-
If you can't even trust in the accuracy of official documents, then what can you trust?
But then, errors and mistakes can be found even there.
-
I clearly owe GrandmaNettie and an open and public apology. My response was clearly bothersome for her and that was not the intent but rather to clarify what I thought was a ridiculous rumor. The fact that it had a dcumentary basis was devastating to my grandstand effort. It is the kind of surprise that leaves one, specifically myself, stunned and humbled and was clearly needed.
But the most important concern is that Grandma Nettie felt she could not come to me directly for an answer. I have always stood for the premise of open and transparent and have maintained an open-door policy in vocation and avocation for far too many years to ever allow that to be jeopardized. Clearly I am guilty of closing this door to Grandma Nettie and for that I apologize and must ask her forgiveness.
I am so sorry, Grandma Nettie, and I humbly seek your forgiveness.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I clearly owe GrandmaNettie and an open and public apology. My response was clearly bothersome for her and that was not the intent but rather to clarify what I thought was a ridiculous rumor. The fact that it had a dcumentary basis was devastating to my grandstand effort. It is the kind of surprise that leaves one, specifically myself, stunned and humbled and was clearly needed.
But the most important concern is that Grandma Nettie felt she could not come to me directly for an answer. I have always stood for the premise of open and transparent and have maintained an open-door policy in vocation and avocation for far too many years to ever allow that to be jeopardized. Clearly I am guilty of closing this door to Grandma Nettie and for that I apologize and must ask her forgiveness.
I am so sorry, Grandma Nettie, and I humbly seek your forgiveness.
Gailon Arthur Joy
I am done mirthing and happy to see this resolved. :thumbsup:
-
Do you believe Gailon is still "mirthing"? Or Mrs. Joy? Yes, I approached you... both by email and IM to try to privately get the information on why both Bob and Gailon seemed to be posting negative statements against Linda all of the sudden. Why would I approach you? Because I care deeply about Linda's welfare and it appeared there was a level of acrimony developing against her. Because you are in constant contact with both Linda and Gailon and in the past have been completely willing to provide clarification when needed. I have operated in that same capacity for Bob and Gailon in the past when they have needed clarification but have not been able, for whatever reason, to approach a source directly.
Obviously I did take it to Gailon just a few hours after you and I IMd from 8:58am to 11:27am on February 24th. Gailon's statement was made publically. The matter was already being address publically. And you are well aware of why I choose not to approach Gailon privately any longer.
WOW!! Were you able to get anything out of SSOM?? My personal experience has been that she shares NOTHING!!! If I had a secret I needed to have taken to a grave, there are not too many I would trust with it, but SSOM is definitely one of them!!
-
WOW!! Were you able to get anything out of SSOM?? My personal experience has been that she shares NOTHING!!! If I had a secret I needed to have taken to a grave, there are not too many I would trust with it, but SSOM is definitely one of them!!
What a lovely compliment for Sonshine On Me. :thumbsup:
-
Our information is that Ewing is leaving. If he leaves they will have to find a replacement. It will be a major project, but one that will speak volumes as
they prepare to replace his position.
Gailon Arthur Joy
Mr. Joy,
Any new information regarding the head accountant? Is Mr. Ewing really leaving? Won't that be a problem for 3ABN? Can you shed any light on the current situation there? Has a replacement been named?
Snoopy
-
No replacement has yet been named but a special board meeting was held and it is likely that was a topic of dicussion. I have heard that he has tendered his resignation for the end of the quarter, specifically the end of March. I do not know the departure date of the other gentleman, yet.
The current board has substantial talent and connections, denominationally and extra-denominationally and should have no problem coming up with a talented individual.
On the other hand, I do not believe the resignation was the only topic. I have heard rumblings that someone who worked in the Accounting Dept recently has issued a letter that would seem to indict the current accounting administration for failure to follow GAAP procedures and has raised quite the furor among directors regarding just how to deal with those charges. I am not sure yet whether the letter, which I have been told went to a lot of directors and officers, came before or after the resignation. If it came before the resignation, it is likely this may have precipitated the resignation. If it came after the resignation, it may have been the strain of dealing with an IRS Criminal Investigation and the stigma that such a process could have on your career, not to mention the premise that you could very well become the scapegoat for decades of inappropriate accounting issues.
The other question is whether the letter also made it to the IRS Criminal Investigation coordinator. It obviously represents a serious challenge to 3ABN's perpetual assertion that "the books are in order" and there is no basis for the "Joy and Pickle claims of wrongdoing". Now to discover it from the clowns...should be loads of fun!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy