Let's talk ESOP

[jbowman]

Originally Posted by gromicko

One of the things we all have to remember is that no one here has a duty to do what's right, let alone guarantee that it comes out right.

What we have a duty to do is to try to do what's right.

One of the problems with ESOP is that there is only one copy of the book "How to Build and Run the World's Largest Inspection Association" and they've misplaced it. I lost my copy too. So without the book, we all just have to wing it and try to do what's right.

Are you saying - Sorry, we all screwed up this time, or what?

If so, I agree...

[James H. Bushart]

I admit that expulsion of Raymond Wand was not the appropriate sanction to apply in this instance.

Until such time that the ESOP Committee has the authority to authorize and to administer the death penalty, we are going to just have to live with it.

[Dale Duffy]

Originally Posted by jbowman

Are you saying - Sorry, we all screwed up this time, or what?

If so, I agree...

I agree also John, some of the most childish, ridiculous, embarrassing circumstances I have seen in a while.

Makes an inspector belonging to this association simply an embarrassment.

I can just imagine what would be going through someones mind looking for an inspector and coming across this non-sense.....and I'm certainly not referring to just this post....unreal...

[Nick Gromicko]

No John, I'm saying that to judge anyone on whether you think they did it right or did it wrong is unfair in lieu of the fact that they are trying to do that which hasn't been done, without help. They have no duty to succeed, because they are very likely in a "damned if we do, damned if we don't" situation.

So what duty do we demand of them? We demand that they TRY to do what's right. That's plenty enough to ask of them... asking any more of them is unfair, as it is likely impossible for them to make a decision that all are happy with.

[rwand1]

Nick,

Don't try and put a politically correct, nice, nice spin on this! The whole ESOP should be released from its duties! You and your posse have harmed the NACHI image all by yourselves. Now its come home to roost.

[Nick Gromicko]

Ray, I haven't really followed this much but correct me if I'm wrong... wasn't this all over you posting a fellow member's private email on a public forum without his permission and then also refusing to delete it when asked?

Seems pretty cut and dry, no?

[rwand1]

Nick don't try and split hairs, you know as well as I do what this was about.

You should be in the Olympic Swim Team you are good at the backstroke.

Delete a message that JF was foolish enough to send to me full of inaccurate falsities? Me thinks JF got caught and you and your band of merry jokers got caught too.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

No John, I'm saying that to judge anyone on whether you think they did it right or did it wrong is unfair in lieu of the fact that they are trying to do that which hasn't been done, without help. They have no duty to succeed, because they are very likely in a "damned if we do, damned if we don't" situation.

So what duty do we demand of them? We demand that they TRY to do what's right. That's plenty enough to ask of them... asking any more of them is unfair, as it is likely impossible for them to end up with everyone thinking they did it right.

What Nick is pointing out and that a few (I say "few" because the supporting PMs and emails show that the majority do get it) do not understand is this:

Most issues are resolved between the members and vendors, themselves. Read the many fights that go on here on many levels and you will see that it is only a few...the ones in which, pick one side and you catch it from the other...that make it to the ESOP Committee.

Since not all that we do even makes the "message board news", it is usually the "popularity" of the decision that determines the measure of response.

Since acting on the complaint to boot out Wand, we have had to deal with two more issues of equal controversy and magnitude that most are totally unaware of.

We are moving ahead knowing that there is nothing we need to prove to those who know what we do, and there is nothing to say or do to change the minds of those who do not appreciate us.

[Nick Gromicko]

I really don't know what this was about. But I'm all ears. Is my assesment of the situation in my post #22 inaccurate?

[jbowman]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Ray, I haven't really followed this much but correct me if I'm wrong... wasn't this all over you posting a fellow member's private email on a public forum without his permission and then also refusing to delete it when asked?

Seems pretty cut and dry, no?

NO....and its embarassing. The coe protects or is written for who? Where is the protection of the member from receiving emails of threats, vulgarity, etc. from other iNACHI members.

Where is the protection of the member against racial, or prejudicial statements or name calling. I for one find it very disturbing to see a member of the ESOP use the term RETARD in his spewings. How about you.

Where is the protection of the MEMBERS.

[Nick Gromicko]

Can you tell me how my assessment of the situation in post #22 is incorrect please?

Seems pretty cut and dry, no?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by rwand1

Delete a message that JF was foolish enough to send to me full of inaccurate falsities? Me thinks JF got caught and you and your band of merry jokers got caught too.

I don't address disgruntled ex-members, directly. It encourages them to post.

So, to the rest of you...note this. This is the part, possibly because this man's parents were siblings prior to marriage, he cannot understand.

Your private communications with each other are none of the ESOP Committee's business. You would have a right to call "foul" the first time anyone is sanctioned for something they authored in an email.

This continious monologue spewed by this idiot that he got a mean or unkind email is none of your, my or the ESOP Committee's business.

We have a longstanding (at least 4 year old policy) that you do not take a communication that was written by a member for private communication purposes and post it on the public board without the author's permission.

Blaine pointed this out to this guy, but he was too absorbed in his effort to get even with and otherwise disparage the author for writing it, that he refused Blaine's warning that sanctions could result in his refusal to delete it.

So...Joe's email is STILL irrelevant to this committee. We don't care what these two or three men said to each other in their email. It is none of our business.

Would you want it to be the business of the ESOP Committee what you privately communicate to another member?

[jbowman]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Can you tell me how my assessment of the situation in post #22 is incorrect please?

Seems pretty cut and dry, no?

First define what a "private" email is? If the originating email author included a disclaimer or a notice of private, we would all agree with you. But such was not the case.

It was an email authored by a iNACHI director eliminating the term "private" email.

Post #22 is inaccurate.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Can you tell me how my assessment of the situation in post #22 is incorrect please?

Seems pretty cut and dry, no?

Very cut and dry.

[rwand1]

Nick I am tired of reading your poor excuses! You have been caught talking out of both sides of your mouth on more than one occassion.

I always had my doubts about you, and I came back into the Nachi fold with my eyes wide open, to give you a second chance. From what I am seeing you use people, then discard them when they become stale and are no longer of use to you. That probably explains the constant turn over.
What is even more regrettable is your attempt to use my good name to give your corrupt association credibility in Canada.