What's Going on at MOFIB?

[mpedersen]

Wait, I just noticed this:

I will be happy to publish in their entirety the rants and recorded conversations between us the moment

Mr. Vera, this implies that you recorded "conversations", as in verbal exchanges. Other than the one time we met in person, every one of those conversations occurred on the phone (BTW it would seem that even our IN PERSON meeting is governed by these laws). You should be aware that legally you cannot record our conversations without notifying me prior and me providing my consent. As I have never agreed to that, by all means, bring on the recordings (which obviously, would have to include my recorded consent).

(from - http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recordi ... merica.htm)

Illinois

Illinois is, by statute, a two-party state. However, case law from both the IL Supreme Court and various Illinois appellate courts have declared Illinois a one-party state in the case of private citizens (businesses and plain folks - NOT law enforcement). The reigning consensus is that one-party consensual recording is merely "enhanced note-taking" and since some folks have total recall without recording, how can the other party have any expectation of privacy to a conversation held with another person.

Illinois requires prior consent of all participants to monitor or record a phone conversation. Ill. Rev. Stat. Ch. 38, Sec. 14-2. There is no specific business telephone exception, but in general courts have found extension telephones do not constitute eavesdropping devices. Criminal penalties for unlawful eavesdropping include up to three years' imprisonment or $10,000 in fines and the civil remedy provides for recovery of actual and punitive damages.

In the state of Illinois it is illegal to monitor cordless phones.

(from - http://www.rcfp.org/taping/)

Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Be aware that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as “two-party consent” laws. If there are more than two people involved in the conversation, all must consent to the taping.

(from - http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/ ... versations)

When must you get permission from everyone involved before recording?

Twelve states require the consent of every party to a phone call or conversation in order to make the recording lawful. These "two-party consent" laws have been adopted in California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Although they are referred to as "two-party consent" laws, consent must be obtained from every party to a phone call or conversation if it involves more than two people. See the State Law: Recording section of this legal guide for information on state wiretapping laws.

Matt

 

[driftin]

I think I would have a lot to offer MOFIB as a BOD member. My concerns are currently fourfold.

1) The complete censorship of any discussion that disagrees with the MOFIB BOD is antithetical to essentially everything I have done in my adult life.

2) MOFIB BOD characterizing disagreements with the MOFIB BOD, and discussion of ways to deal with those disagreements, as terrorism is extremely worrisome, and is not a culture I think I would enjoy joining.

3) At least one of the sitting MOFIB BOD really doesn't like me. He tried to have me removed as a MOFIB mod because I publicly expressed my disagreement with what the MOFIB BOD was doing. I am not sure a constructive working relationship is possible with such a person.

4) By the nature of the way decisions have been made in the last several months, it seems the upcoming BOD has been set up to be combative, which is something I don't believe I need in my life.

At this moment, I think I will 'prolly turn down the 'chance' to be elected. If that is indeed my final decision on the matter, I hope MOFIB eventually recovers from this mess, or that another website takes its place.

I do think the election committee in place right now is fantastic, but I think they are saddled with not good rules and timelines. I think that if such a comittee had been put in place at the beginning of this mess, as many called for, we would applying all this energy to breeding.

As your nominator, I'm officially disappointed. So much so that I created a username here just to tell you as much. One of my main considerations in choosing to nominate you was your proven ability to form and communicate independent opinions and reasoning. I didn't agree with all of your points, but the fact that you presented often differing, dissenting opinions in an clear, non-emotion-driven, adult manner gave me great respect for your abilities to debate and form conclusions. The fact that you did so in response to actively hostile forum members without "losing your cool" further addded to my faith in your abilities.

I was aware of each of the conditions you mention above, but sincerely felt two weeks ago, and even more-so today, that you can be an active and extremely effective part of a leadership for change. (Am I stealing part of that line??) There are some amazing individuals in that list of nominees, and the forerunners (in my opinion) would likely be in agreement with your observations and would share in your reactions in points 1, 2, and 4. In fact, many probably feel the same way as you in point #3. I know I personally would if I were running for the board. I may be part of a diminishing minority, but I have the utmost faith that the newly elected board members will be empowered to make the changes that are necessary to bring confidence back in the leadership and management of the site. If through nothing else, majority vote.

Perhaps I am overly optimistic, but I truly believe that the new 4 members will be likeminded and will bring the ship around, so to speak. Please do not remove yourself from consideration just yet.

-Jim

 

[Anonymous]

I think I would have a lot to offer MOFIB as a BOD member. My concerns are currently fourfold.

1) The complete censorship of any discussion that disagrees with the MOFIB BOD is antithetical to essentially everything I have done in my adult life.

2) MOFIB BOD characterizing disagreements with the MOFIB BOD, and discussion of ways to deal with those disagreements, as terrorism is extremely worrisome, and is not a culture I think I would enjoy joining.

3) At least one of the sitting MOFIB BOD really doesn't like me. He tried to have me removed as a MOFIB mod because I publicly expressed my disagreement with what the MOFIB BOD was doing. I am not sure a constructive working relationship is possible with such a person.

4) By the nature of the way decisions have been made in the last several months, it seems the upcoming BOD has been set up to be combative, which is something I don't believe I need in my life.

At this moment, I think I will 'prolly turn down the 'chance' to be elected. If that is indeed my final decision on the matter, I hope MOFIB eventually recovers from this mess, or that another website takes its place.

I do think the election committee in place right now is fantastic, but I think they are saddled with not good rules and timelines. I think that if such a comittee had been put in place at the beginning of this mess, as many called for, we would applying all this energy to breeding.

As your nominator, I'm officially disappointed. So much so that I created a username here just to tell you as much. One of my main considerations in choosing to nominate you was your proven ability to form and communicate independent opinions and reasoning. I didn't agree with all of your points, but the fact that you presented often differing, dissenting opinions in an clear, non-emotion-driven, adult manner gave me great respect for your abilities to debate and form conclusions. The fact that you did so in response to actively hostile forum members without "losing your cool" further addded to my faith in your abilities.

I was aware of each of the conditions you mention above, but sincerely felt two weeks ago, and even more-so today, that you can be an active and extremely effective part of a leadership for change. (Am I stealing part of that line??) There are some amazing individuals in that list of nominees, and the forerunners (in my opinion) would likely be in agreement with your observations and would share in your reactions in points 1, 2, and 4. In fact, many probably feel the same way as you in point #3. I know I personally would if I were running for the board. I may be part of a diminishing minority, but I have the utmost faith that the newly elected board members will be empowered to make the changes that are necessary to bring confidence back in the leadership and management of the site. If through nothing else, majority vote.

Perhaps I am overly optimistic, but I truly believe that the new 4 members will be likeminded and will bring the ship around, so to speak. Please do not remove yourself from consideration just yet.

-Jim

Thanks for the kind words of support Jim. I do hope you know I am putting considerable time and thought into this decision, and I will be sorry if I ultimately disappoint you with my final decision.

Going into the BOD with the idea of ignoring the sitting BOD or outright removing them ASAP seems strange. There is also the very real possibility that the majority of the new BOD will 'side' with the sitting BOD which almost seems to make being on the BOD fruitless. I suppose that I could always resign if that happens, but again, it seems strange to go into the BOD with that mindset. I had hoped to have these discussion with other nominees on MOFIB, but, even though current MOFIB leadership has no problem coming here to have MOFIB political discussions, those kinds of discussions are still not allowed on MOFIB.

Any advice would be appreciated.

 

[Anonymous]

What would your dad tell you? Would it be different from what your mother had to say? Where does your heart truly lie?

 

[Anonymous]

Thales I hope you eventually decide to run. I think Jim hit many good points

FWIW I nominated Seafarm as I have never seen him loose his cool in person or online He sits on many BODs and knows how to steer and guide them.

 

[Ummfish]

Thales: I, too, hope that you ultimately decide to run. I believe that in order for things to work over at MOFIB, four thoughtful and independent-minded individuals must be elected in. If all the people who were nominated and who have misgivings about working with the current BOD decide not to run, then that flat-out will not happen. And, if that's what's fated then what have all of these months of worry and argument been about? Might as well just have walked away completely. You've put a lot of effort into ensuring that these elections will happen. If I may paraphrase: The reward of a job well done is more work.

 

[driftin]

...
Going into the BOD with the idea of ignoring the sitting BOD or outright removing them ASAP seems strange.
...

Again, possibly over-optimistic here, but - my personal opinion is that it may not come to either of those scenarios. I am greatly disappointed in the decisions made by Luis and John recently, but don't feel that they will necessarily be a blockade. I think even Matt has said that in the past they agreed at a high level on changes that needed to happen, but couldn't reach concensus on how to achieve those changes. Well, now it's not going to be John's vision vs Matt's vision with Luis on the side abstaining from the vote. It's going to be a board of 7. There will be a concensus when a motion is brought to the table. And that includes the topic of post-moderation and freedom of communication. Why do I think they won't be a complete hinderence? At least they've worked with Mark thus far to get the elections rolling, as flawed as they may be.

 

[Rook]

Just found this post from the first page of this long thread and felt that it was quite apropos.

It is worth it. Many NPOs, especially ones that grow from hobbies, go through a painful shakedown. Hopefully, this is the last one for MOFIB. Since the BOD is currently 'broken' perhaps you should call for an interim committee made up of 5 people who are not currently on the BOD currently to manage the current situation. A total of 3 BOD members who don't agree and won't step down and are at odd with each other is a recipe for insanity IMO. Now that I think of it, the moderators could have run this election if that was really how they felt.

Sorry this is happening Matt - it can't be very fun.

 

[Anonymous]

Is MOFIB an NPO at the state and federal level?

 

[Anonymous]

Here is my other issue. Work is going to be insane for the next 100 days. So if I run, and I get elected, I would prolly only be a 'back end' BOD member without much time to be publicly posting. Any thoughts?

 

[naesco]

Thales, it seems to me that with all the outstanding issues, many of which have been posted here, a 100% commitment would be needed from the get go.
It appears to me from reading the postings here that the new board will have to deal with them immediately or them will lose membership and squabbles will continue.
Maybe take a run at it next time, eh!

 

[gdw]

Greetings All !

... Any advice would be appreciated.

Thales ... yours is one of the few voices in this forum that commands my respect. I don't always share your perspective, but your contributions of knowledge, goodwill, passion, and willingness to give of your time to multiple cyber-extensions of the marine ornamental industry speak for themselves ... [thunderous applause]. While I am typically content to enjoy the 'Industry Behind the Hobby' shadow puppet theatre without comment, I respectfully advise that you run from the MOFIB BOD nomination as though it were the plague ... as fast as your little feets can carry you ...

... because that's how far the degeneration has progressed. Witness the escalation of irrational inter-personal savagery. 8O :|

We all know what happens when the music stops, don't we? Has everyone forgotten the seemingly spontaneous combustion of AquaLink? ... The genesis of RC? ... (the list goes on ad nauseum) ... The birthing process of MOFIB itself? We've all seen this dance before, have we not? Stepping into the breach between a board of directors gone destructively lawless (with personal agenda tumblers spinning quietly towards alignment just out of public view), and a unique, gifted, inspirational founder gone passive-aggressive insurgent ... strikes me as a waste of your time and skills. Better perhaps is to wait for the fog of the current civil war carnage to clear somewhat to see if there's going to be anything left alive that's worth salvaging.

JMO ... which along with three dollars will get you a tall cafe mocha at Starbucks. :mrgreen:

BTW, I'm an MOFIB member since 2007 who has posted many links in other cyberspaces to MOFIB, and who has had numerous conversations with importers, LFS owners, and hobbyists advocating their involvement with MOFIB. However, my post count in MOFIB has apparently rendered me ineligible to participate in the emergent political process. Of far greater concern to me was the recent assertion by the board of directors of copyright ownership of anything that I, or any other member, might post in MOFIB ... utter madness.


FWIW ... HTH
:wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Greetings All !

... Any advice would be appreciated.

Thales ... yours is one of the few voices in this forum that commands my respect. I don't always share your perspective, but your contributions of knowledge, goodwill, passion, and willingness to give of your time to multiple cyber-extensions of the marine ornamental industry speak for themselves ... [thunderous applause].

Thanks! I am always amazed at how few people seem to understand that not agreeing doesn't equal not respect. Thanks for the kind words.

While I am typically content to enjoy the 'Industry Behind the Hobby' shadow puppet theatre without comment, I respectfully advise that you run from the MOFIB BOD nomination as though it were the plague ... as fast as your little feets can carry you ...

I know what you mean. My back brain has been yelling that at me since the whole idea of being on the BOD came up.

... because that's how far the degeneration has progressed. Witness the escalation of irrational inter-personal savagery. 8O :|

We all know what happens when the music stops, don't we? Has everyone forgotten the seemingly spontaneous combustion of AquaLink? ... The genesis of RC? ... (the list goes on ad nauseum) ... The birthing process of MOFIB itself? We've all seen this dance before, have we not? Stepping into the breach between a board of directors gone destructively lawless (with personal agenda tumblers spinning quietly towards alignment just out of public view), and a unique, gifted, inspirational founder gone passive-aggressive insurgent ... strikes me as a waste of your time and skills. Better perhaps is to wait for the fog of the current civil war carnage to clear somewhat to see if there's going to be anything left alive that's worth salvaging.

Thats kind of the only thing keeping me entertaining the idea. The bones of MOFIB are incredibly useful, and they already exist. If we could just get rid of the cumbersome flesh that have moved MOFIB away from being an open and honest community we would be in good shape.

BTW, I'm an MOFIB member since 2007 who has posted many links in other cyberspaces to MOFIB, and who has had numerous conversations with importers, LFS owners, and hobbyists advocating their involvement with MOFIB. However, my post count in MOFIB has apparently rendered me ineligible to participate in the emergent political process. Of far greater concern to me was the recent assertion by the board of directors of copyright ownership of anything that I, or any other member, might post in MOFIB ... utter madness.

Yep! All of that strikes me as crazy as well. As I said in the past, I find it insane that the sitting MOFIB BOD would enact so many measures with a looming election.

I guess I have till 11 am EST tomorrow to decide. Perhaps I will accept the nomination know full well that if it all goes downhill that I can alway resign if elected. Several have communicated to me that that option seems better than doing nothing. Oy!

 

[Rook]

Here is my other issue. Work is going to be insane for the next 100 days. So if I run, and I get elected, I would prolly only be a 'back end' BOD member without much time to be publicly posting. Any thoughts?

Thales,

MOFIB is a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Illinois. MOFIB is not a tax-exempt or charitable organization. There is a big difference. A non-profit exists for the benefit of the state and its members; however its earnings cannot be distributed or inure to the benefit of the members, directors, etc. A profit corporation make money and gives it to the shareholders. To be clear, a non-profit it self can generate profits and revenues; but it cannot distribute that to the members. Whether you are a non-profit or for profit corporation is a state law issue.

A tax-exempt organization is a federal tax law designation. A tax exempt must be a non-profit (with very limited exemption). However a non-profit does not have to be tax exempt.

A tax exempt simply means that the corporation qualifies under one of many possible categories of corporations that the IRS deems worthy of not paying taxes. The most commonly known is a charitable organization; I.E. United Way. Charitable orgs can receive donations from the public and the donor gets a tax deduction for it. Most hobby clubs are tax exempt social organizations; same as a fraternity. They are tax exempt but donations are not tax deductible for the donor.

In spite of being called "tax-exempt" many of these companies do in fact pay some tax.

That is my very short review of an otherwise complicated issue

Further, a directors primary responsibility is to attend meetings and vote. Thus, your minimum time commitment is to be sure to attend meetings; be informed of the votes; and vote. Whether you post regularly or contribute in additional ways is not a technical requirement.

 

[Anonymous]

Since MOFIB BOD were posting here, I thought it would make sense to let the rest of MOFIB know there was political discussion going on about the MOFIB election. Before I posted the link to this thread, I posted about it in the MOFIB moderators forum, and even though there were many views, no one made a comment. Today, I posted a link, just a link, to this thread, and it was removed in minutes.

 

[Anonymous]

Tmie is running short Thales....remember if you want to accept...before June 27, 2009 at 11:59 PM U.S. EDT is the deadline

 

[Anonymous]

I was requested to respond to [email protected] regarding my nomination, I did, and it bounced. I forwarded my response to everyone on the election committee. I hope they get it.

 

[Anonymous]

I was requested to respond to [email protected] regarding my nomination, I did, and it bounced. I forwarded my response to everyone on the election committee. I hope they get it.

that makes two of us, but, did you look at the bounce fully as mine only had one bad email as it is appears to be a group email and not a single one. They may have in fact got it.

 

[spk]

Thales, Gresham,
Forward me the email address that bounced please.
What happens is that [email protected], should be forwarded to the election comittee themselves.

Thanks
Steve

 

[Rook]

Thales, Gresham,

The Election Committee has received both of your replies. For some reason, aomont's email forward was not working anymore; this is being corrected.