The first win against the 'troll's damage

Congratulations to Ossie Kilkenny. For fighting back against the lies spread about him. For taking the time and resources necessary to follow through.

Susan Boyle manager accepts libel damages

Daily Mail to pay 'substantial' damages to Susan Boyle's former manager

Daily Mail in libel payout to Susan Boyle adviser

Ossie Kilkenny wins damages over claim he was unfit to handle Susan Boyle’s business affairs

Though I have absolutely no insider knowledge of Mr. Kilkenny's legal case, I am in a position to know that our serial 'cyber-troll' was involved in this, and many other lies.

I have stated this many times, at the forum while I was a volunteer, directly to the Board and Staff there, as well as on my own blogs. Re-read this post from September 25, 2010.

Serial Cyber-Stalker, Cyber-Bully Alert

FYI, no one has ever contacted me about that post. Interesting to note, as the post is easily found online..anyone doing elementary due diligence would have read it.

The following quote from that blog should have resulted in someone contacting Citroenlady and/or myself.

"Though our data is only part of the entire story - we have substantiated over 100 identities, incidents, victims. It is likely that this person (or persons) has been harassing Susan Boyle, her family, her friends, her management teams in addition to her fans."

This is just one venue where I have CLEARLY stated that we have data that someone in authority should have been curious about. In addition to other efforts, Citroenlady and I did offer our data directly to Team SuBo, as we were told that they had an investigation underway ... I am still waiting for my call. Hmmmm

So, congratulations again to Mr. Kilkenny.

His is the first resolution, though I doubt the last, of the 'serial cyber-troll's' damage.

The Cult of Kalua: A Hypothesis

In view of the latest example of denial of due process at SBFII  (see links below for the unfortunate details) I wondered what turns ordinary people into bullies and abusers of the elderly, which brought me to the topic of cults.

Here are two definitions.  The first is from Merriam Webster: (The first 4 definitions relate specifically to religious cults, which are not exactly applicable, although some might argue differently). Here is their definition:
"#5: a. a great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book) especially: such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad)
    b. the object of such devotion
    c. a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion."

And the second, on Wikipedia:
"The word cult pejoratively refers to a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre." OED, (Oxford English Dictionary)citing American Journal of Sociology 85 (1980), p. 1"Cults[...], like other deviant social movements, tend to recruit people with a grievance, people who suffer from a(sic) some variety of deprivation."

Now the object of devotion at SBFII is not the celebrity to whom the site is devoted, but rather to the administrators, particularly the one known as Kalua.  Why do I say that?  Because Kalua, not the celebrity, is the one who gives the site the characteristics of a cult.

Dr. Michael Langone, PhD. is an American counseling psychologist who specializes in research about "cultic groups" and alleged psychological manipulation. He is executive director of the International Cultic Studies Association, and editor of the journal Cultic Studies Review.

He states, "Concerted efforts at influence and control lie at the core of cultic groups, programs, and relationships. Many members, former members, and supporters of cults are not fully aware of the extent to which members may have been manipulated, exploited, even abused. The following list of social-structural, social-psychological, and interpersonal behavioral patterns commonly found in cultic environments may be helpful in assessing a particular group or relationship.

1. The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
2. Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
3. The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
4. The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
5. The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
6. The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
7. The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion."

Dr. Langone gives some additional characteristics, but they are directed at cults which have common living quarters or a primarily religious focus, not the case at SBFII.

But why should the current beliefs or practices at SBFII, particularly in its relationship with Kalua, be considered "abnormal or bizarre"?

Kalua planned on being the Director of the Board, but only on his/her own terms.  When the owner of the site incorporated the non-profit SBFII, she wanted legitimate identification of his/her identity, so that she knew who she was selling the site to.  In view of the numerous internet scams going on, this was only prudent. Kalua, however, has always hidden his/her true identity, and resigned rather than reveal who he/she really was for this business transaction. This precipitated a revolt by the members of the remaining staff, who abandoned their responsibilities, sabotaged the site's computer software, and initiated a campaign of public libel and harassment against the elderly owner, her technical assistant and other members of the fan community.

All this has been documented and proven earlier in the blogs below. How did the membership, the staff and later the Board respond to Kalua's (supposedly a Chilean national) refusal to verify his/her real identity in order to direct a legal American non-profit corporation?  He/she was praised and considered to be unjustly persecuted.  The first order of business of the new Board of Directors was to beg for him/her to return as staff administrator, and later they gave him/her an apology for his/her "mistreatment".  Note that the entire Board was made fully aware that Kalua regularly claimed that he/she was in danger of being murdered if discovered. The Board willfully chose to ignore or address that issue at all. The provider of that information was libeled instead.

Stop and think for a moment.  SBFII claims a membership of 55,000.  Think of another organization that size--the Red Cross or the YMCA, for example.  Can you imagine them accepting as Director someone who refused to provide identifying information that could be verified, such as a real address or a current place of business?  Or on a more personal level--if your teenage daughter was corresponding with someone who identified himself as a teenage boy, but refused to provide any information about himself that could be verified, would you let her go off and meet him alone in another city?  If you would, I have a few sad stories to tell you about the results of that naive behavior.

I can give examples of the 7 characteristics listed above in relationship to Kalua, but this is already an awfully long post, and the blogs below can give you more information about a specific example of Kalua, who claims to be in his/her thirties, again bullying a senior woman.  Read them and weep.  Or swear.

Of course, this is only a hypothesis, isn't it?  I welcome any comments for or against it, especially if they are related to the 7 items Dr. Langone proposed as characteristics of a cult.

As always, I stand ready to provide documentation of all I say in court. As has been stated on this blog multiple times, I welcome any and all legal inquiries.



http://newsforsusanboylefans.blogspot.com/

http://thesusanboylereview.blogspot.com/

Another Captain Carlos Ramirez

Credit source :
http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Carlos_Ramirez

Happy Anniversary

One year ago the admins, moderators, and some of the other members of forum.susan-boyle.com planned and executed an attack on that forum by means of computer tampering and character defamation of the owner of record, her technical assistant, and members of that forum and others. Their motivation is still unclear. They appear to have been inspired in part by a known cyberstalker who hates Susan Boyle and her fans, but why they believed that stranger over people they knew, had spoken to, and had even met, remains a mystery.  They have never explained the reasons for their actions, retracted the false statements they made, nor acknowledged that what they did in the database and elsewhere was morally and legally wrong.  Instead they blamed their victims and have continued to do so to this day.

Saturday they launched yet another diatribe under the name "SBFII" a bogus identity created because its authors had neither the courage nor the integrity to write it under their own names. For me, pointing out its obvious falsehoods is a useless exercise.  Been there, done that.  People who can deny the evidence of the computer files, their own posts, their emails, their chat room logs, etc. don't wish to listen to reason; they prefer the sound of their own unsubstantiated rhetoric. They may attempt to delete the records of their prior actions and words, but the original files still exist.

What is unfortunate is the degree to which they have deliberately divided the Susan Boyle community.  In addition to their unwarranted attack a year ago, their draconian measures in getting rid of people they disliked through rules made up on the instant, and eliminated as quickly when their friends broke the same rules, alienated many who had originally respected them. Again, they blame their victims instead of acknowledging their own part in this disintegration of the community.

I founded SBFII for the fans, to provide them with transparency and accountability. That was sabotaged from the beginning. Staff delayed the responsible formation of the non-profit, delayed the sale of the site to the non-profit, and of course have never wanted to be accountable to anyone other than themselves. The forum focus has shifted from protecting and supporting fans, to protecting and supporting staff, regardless of what the staff do.   If SBFII deteriorates into a for-profit, rigidly controlled PR machine that doles out visits to Susan based on adherence to admin propaganda, so be it.  It doesn't stop the rest of us from enjoying Susan's music, or supporting her in an honest way.  It will not be the first time I've seen a non-profit organization destroyed by its own administrators.

Sooner or later I believe justice will be done through the courts.   It took 6 years, and several incomplete police investigations, before the phone hacking/police bribery crimes in the UK were taken seriously, but now the arrests are coming. The last time I was involved in a federal investigation, it took 4 years before the Grand Jury was called.  In the meantime I just kept collecting evidence. That's what I'm doing now. And sadly, the SBFII staff keep on supplying it.

Correction about shared hosting account

Just a clarification of a comment made by PT today on the forum.
Paul Wood insisted on the new hostgator account - would not let us assume his - he had a shared hosting account - we were assigned a separate shared hosting account. I did negotiate with hostgator that our shared hosting account be on the same server as Paul's to avoid downtime. 

So, to be clear. There was never a dedicated server. I did not transfer the site to a shared server. Paul and hostgator handled that part. Dyebat and I supplied contact and payment and ID for the new account. That is all.

I am happy to post all the correspondence with Paul, Dyebat, Dani, Kalua, and PT on this issue, if requested. 

Save your files, please!

Kalua's announcement at forum.susan-boyle.com regarding their intent to delete threads and posts due to database size is troubling. It is not necessary. There are alternatives to handling and backing up that database, including archival, which I suggested many many times...most recently a few weeks ago directly to a Board Member.

Crimes (including felonies) have been committed at forum.susan-boyle.com and the management (Admins and Board Members-past and present) are legally responsible for their actions in the actual crimes and the cover-up of the crimes. Knowingly deleting or tampering with evidence is also a serious crime.

I urge the Board to reconsider this action of modifying the database while the criminal matters are unresolved.

Personally, I have protected the data that I have collected from multiple sites and I urge you all to do the same. Your PM's, emails, screen grabs, and digital files from April 2009 to present may be requested via subpoena in the coming months. If you need help or advice on how to do so - please email me
sbfandomourstory@gmail.com.

It is also not lost on me that the OS was also taken down rather quickly just after the threat of legal action. A police investigation had already been underway for some time regarding activities on that site. I sincerely hope that, behind the scenes, the OS is cooperating fully and providing the necessary data. And that they are able to find software and/or programmers that can put some basic security in place to better protect members in the future. It has been, so far, a few weeks with no update on the site status from the OS.

Despite the pressure and attacks against us, Dyebat and I managed to complete our obligation and Dyebat incorporated SBFII - effective Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 4:42 PM  Certificate of Incorporation DE. From that point forward, all of you have legal recourse against any corporate wrongdoing.  Against the Corporation and/or individuals acting on behalf of the Corporation.

For 2+ years, the management at the OS and at forum.susan-boyle.com have disregarded and dismissed (and in some cases abetted) the bullying, harassment, stalking, and/or defamation of members. No amount of pleading or proof has made them take this situation seriously.


So, while Dyebat, CL, Knudt and I (and others) do our part behind the scenes, we ask you to do yours. Save what you have and write up any incidents that you were involved in, have knowledge of, or data for.

Thank you,  Chris

ARTICLE X

If anyone cares to know what my interest in Article X of the by-laws at SBFII is, it is this:

I WROTE IT.

Perhaps I should have copyrighted it.  They are my words, as written on June 19, 2010, and no change was made to them by staff or Board during the period of review before they were published.  I have every right to explain the original intent so that it is not misinterpreted.

For any organization, the issue of changing by-laws has to be addressed in the initial by-laws or else the  organization is stuck with the same ones forever.  Article X was written to be enabling, not restricting. It states one way in which they MAY be changed.  It does not say they can't be changed in any other way. If I, the staff, or the Board intended that to be the only way, we could have added "only" or "exclusively".  None of us did so.

The Board has every right to choose not to change by-laws until next year, but that is THEIR choice, not the requirement of Article X. A "no" vote on the proposed new by-laws does not mean they HAVE to wait to make changes until next year. They have every right to do so, but to tell members it is Article X that requires that, is incorrect.  How members vote, and what the Board does after that vote, is none of my business, but misinterpreting my words and their intent IS my business.

J.K. Rowling is finished writing the Harry Potter series, but if someone changed the ending, and said that was what she really intended to write, do you think she might object?

Possible Conflict of Interest (COI) Issue

I am being asked why this was not addressed previously, so let me clarify a few points to prevent confusion and misunderstanding. And, for those wondering about my status..I resigned from susan-boyle.com after the 4th time that I was locked out without cause. I am still a member of the Susan Boyle online community and I remain involved in legal matters addressing criminal actions in this community.


On July 28, 2010, the first Board meeting was to be held.

Cicichi (as the first to accept a seat) was to start that meeting. I provided technical assistance to Cicichi and she set up a separate Campfire Chat account - private from all (including me) except the Board. As she had never chaired such a meeting, I also wrote and sent her a draft agenda.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Cicichi,
Here are some notes to help with chairing the first Board Meeting.
I'll send supporting documents in about an hour.
Chris

What Must be Done at the First Board of Directors Meeting?

1. Call The Meeting To Order
2. Roll Call/Introductions
3. Election of officers
(typically start with suggesting the highest ranked person (Tink-Admin) as Chairman - then ask for nominations/volunteers for the rest. Not required, but it would be nice to have a mix of Staff/Non-Staff. It may also be a good idea to have the secretary be USA based as the registrar in Delaware will need to mail any corporate docs to the secretary)

Chairman
Vice Chairman
Secretary
Chief Financial Officer

4. Chairman may take over from here
5. Authorize the Secretary to take minutes
6. Authorize the Chief Financial Officer (or the officers of this corporation) to open a bank account in the name of the corporation
(see bank notes below )
7. Acknowledge (approve) the name SBFII
8. Acknowledge (approve) the corporate address (registrar)
9. Acknowledge that the Articles of Incorporation have been filed
10. Approve the corporate by-laws

11. Approve the conflict of interest policy and require all board members to sign the policy. (these do not exist yet, perhaps assign someone to write a draft?)

12. Buy the site(s) from MJ

The board may have other specific business to discuss in addition to these
typical organizational resolutions.

After the meeting, the Board Secretary should distribute the minutes of this meeting for approval, and after approved, place them in the corporate records book.

BANK SELECTION NOTES
(the Board can select one of the two banks recommended below, or choose another)
note : edited the rest of bank notes collected from Kalua and Dyebat
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I have been told by a Board Member in attendance at that meeting that PT did address the COI. She asked who would like to work on a COI statement with her. Cicichi volunteered to do so.

note #1
PT did not initially disclose to Dyebat that she also held an Admin position at the OS. Dyebat and I were not aware of this potential conflict of interest until PT informed me in a PM on July 14, 2010. "My gut tells me that a few folk know that Jessie and Tink are the same person and that this was an attempt to cause trouble. Using my dual role could be seen by the malcontents as a conflict of interest and abuse of power -their favourite phrase - and they will not see the benefits of the links between the two sites. "

note#2
The Bylaws were originally drafted by Dyebat and placed in a writeboard in the SBFII Basecamp Project Management area where all staff had access..to comment and/or modify. Many commented and changes were made based on staff and admin comments. The final draft was given to PT and she made a few final changes.

note#3 AMENDMENT OF BYLAWS
These by-laws may be amended by the voting membership of the organization at its regular annual meeting by a majority of the members voting by electronic means which limit each person to one vote.
There is nothing to prohibit bylaws being amended at other times, as it does not state that by-laws may only be amended...at its general meeting, or any other restrictive language.


note#4
Kalua is a stickler for any and all legal matters, however minute, in regard to the SBFII sites. Yet dismissive of requests for universally accepted levels of requests for transparency, disclosure, financial transparency, and other legal issues regarding SBFII itself.

There is simply no good reason for such resistance to SBFII having a COI statement, or disclosure of lender names/amounts and repayment. Lenders were never to be anonymous. The resistance to adhere to the original agreement makes it appear as if there is something to hide.

February 2010:  A thread suggesting gifts to buy Susan was active on the forum. I posted that we consider donating to a charity on her behalf instead. As there was some interest, I created a Kiva lending group. Many celebrities/groups have lending groups. Kalua notified me that this was inappropriate to discuss on the forum, so I created a separate website on February 28, 2010 for the Susan Boyle Kiva Lending Team.

Kalua then informed me that I needed a disclaimer at my new site and for my team (the other celebrity teams don't seem to need disclaimers). I thought this odd, but agreed. We then went back and forth a bit, as Kalua insisted the disclaimer cover a lot of ground.

Here is the disclaimer Kalua approved:

This project is not associated with Susan Boyle, nor any of the individuals or companies associated with or managing Susan Boyle, nor with any existing Susan Boyle fan sites.

Why not use something similar as part of the COI statement for SBFII?

All Administrators and Directors and Officers and Members of a Committee with Board Delegated Power should disclose any and all agreements and/or financial interest with Susan Boyle or with any of the individuals or companies associated with or managing Susan Boyle, or with any existing Susan Boyle fan sites.

To simplify the process, use the IRS model Conflict of Interest policy as a template, which is an attachment to Form 1023. Edit as necessary.

It should be obvious by now that the only reason that this process is taking so long and is so much work is that some are working against it. Still.

By-law Revision

It has been nearly a year since I drafted the original by-laws for the Susan Boyle Fans International non-profit organization which runs the susan-boyle.com fansite, forum and the SuBo stores.

The revised by-laws will soon be presented for adoption at the first annual general membership meeting.

Although I resigned from the fansite some months ago, I still feel a responsibility to inform members of an important change that needs to be made in order to ensure that the organization does not jeopardize its non-profit status.

The original mission statement read that the purpose of corporation was "promoting and supporting the singer Susan Boyle". However, shortly after submitting the draft mission statement, lchris and I discovered that it was necessary to change the wording in order to obtain the non-profit status. It should be "promoting and supporting the fans of the singer Susan Boyle", or "promoting and supporting the fandom of the singer Susan Boyle".

We researched and/or spoke with existing non-profit fan clubs that were approved by the IRS, non-profit consultants and lawyers, The Company Corporation (the registered agent for SBFII in Delaware, where it was incorporated), and 3 levels of the IRS.

Of course, fandoms promote and support their team, singer, actor/actress; that is what fans do. Yet, written as originally submitted, the IRS will interpret "promoting and supporting the singer Susan Boyle" as though SBFII is directly involved with supporting the commercial entities that make up Teams SuBo. The IRS would reject the request for SBFII's non-profit status.

The wording change is not optional. If SBFII is to be awarded non-profit status, the wording change is a requirement.

There are other changes that could be made to the by-laws; that's normal for any corporation, and should be carried out by the members and the Board.

This one, the change in wording of the Mission Statement, is crucial to the original purpose for which we represented the members in buying the site.

That purpose (as stated publicly on the forum to all before we agreed to collect pledges and place a bid on behalf of members) was to form a non-profit corporate entity which would own the site(s) for the benefit of its members, with a Board of Directors that would manage the site(s).

Staff and the subsequent Board were informed long ago of this Mission Statement change and why it was necessary. Perhaps, with all of the many issues to tackle and tasks to complete, this item has been forgotten or overlooked?

We bring this to the attention of all members of the Susan Boyle community, and have emailed this post directly to the Admins and Board Members.

With Best Regards,
dyebat and lchris

Progress Report : If something is worth doing, it's worth doing well

By now, many of you are aware that Knudt is currently reporting the findings from her investigation of the July 18 incident. This investigation and report is, frankly, what the Board promised members, yet failed to deliver. The complete report will be made available to all members as a PDF, with a summary. At that time, we will also hold a question/answer/discussion session. Meanwhile, you can submit questions here.

Why Knudt?
Knudt was already investigating the incident through publicly available data, was close, and was interested in getting to the truth. Knudt is logical, fact-based, focused, and detail-oriented. And one step removed from the direct involvement that Dyebat, CL, and I had in this incident.

Dyebat, CL and I are grateful that Knudt was willing to spend so much of her time to do this part for us, and for all the members of the Susan Boyle online community that wanted to know what really happened back in July.

Knudt spent months sifting through a variety of data, interviewing people, and asking questions. She did not begin posting until she was sure.

Why are these investigations taking so long?
The simple answer is that a number of people have gone to a lot of trouble to create confusion, distractions, and cover up the truth.

Why should we believe you?
Dyebat and I certify that the data we have collected (and/or have shared) is unaltered by us. Personally, I have kept copies of all data intact, all PC's used during my involvement, all email accounts and BaseCamp and CampFire accounts active for any potential legal investigations. In short, we stand behind our data and our findings. We stand behind Knudt and CL's integrity. We welcome any legal inquiries or investigations. Just be advised and aware that we have more data that cannot be posted publicly.

Dyebat and I will have more comments when Knudt's reporting is completed.

Corrections to Mirrim's Post of February 17th

I have just been sent a post made by Mirrim at the susan-boyle.com forum on February 17th. I'd like to address a few items. The italicized snippets are quoted from the post.

1. "A "takeover" was not by the "DJG forum" but influence was asserted by some members of a different fan forum, some of whom were members of DJG's site."

Actually, Mirrim, only 1 member of that 'different' site whose username was Zenneo* (AKA the cyber-bully, cyber-stalker) was spreading the lie that there was to be a takeover attempt of the susan-boyle.com forum by members of that 'different' site. You fell for it, as did several Staff, Admins, members. Then you all took direct actions to disrupt the forum and the members. Then you all covered up that you were in any way involved and protected the cyber-bully and blamed others.

Knudt will report her findings soon, so I won't go into details on that here. I will state that I personally believe that you were acting on the belief that you were protecting the site. I wish you would have at least mentioned that you were corresponding with the cyber-bully and how that affected what happened. Why are you all still protecting him?

*Mark Conner, Orgonon, Orgonon P,

2. "As an aside, I would urge the individual (a former mod) who gave text of MSN conversations to non-participants to buck up and identify herself here and state the purpose behind her doing so. "

I have stated numerous times that at least one copy of that MSN conversation was distributed (unwittingly) by JudyOkla back in May of 2010, and I did share it with a few people. That most likely explains how that particular chat was spread.

The other data being published online has been collected by members and former members through several permission error incidents that allowed access to the Staff Room.

note: edited to add part of CL's response from the comment area..

"Several 'staff' knew the cyber stalker troll as walkerd, John, Mark, John Parke and John/Mark Brabban under his male aliases. His female aliases included Jenny, Zoe, Carol, MaryAnn and Brenda.

It is plain to me that even now, some members and ex-staff members are still not clear that we are talking about just one cyber troll who used all these names!"

About the Miserable User Modification...the rest of the story

I submitted a comment on that anonymous blog last night, which has not been passed through yet, so I will post a similar comment here.

The "Miserable User Modification." was never installed, nor seriously considered by anyone. It was brought up by me, in jest. After a day of many fights on the forum and we were all tired of the never-ending dramas. Anonymous left my name off of that post. I am the unnamed 'former moderator'. Perhaps they are missing the entire thread and chats regarding this? Who knows?

So, again - that mod/add-on feature was never installed and that post was written by me. I was never actually a mod, nor would anyone ever want me to be.

Another rumor to address

Just heard a rumor that a Staff member at SBFII is apparently spreading - that I am involved in a new hacking event. If so, let me address this right now.

I have not hacked or attempted to hack into your site or any site, nor do I have any interest in doing so. I have never even used a proxy. 

Nope, Not us.

Just to quell a few new rumors..

1. Dyebat, Citroenlady, Knudt and I are not in any way involved with any anonymous blogs or twitter accounts. We have always posted with our names and will continue to do so.

2. While we certainly can empathize with the frustration and anger that many fans have towards SBFII and/or the Staff, and/or some members - we are working through data to get at the truth. We are dealing with facts. We don't agree with mixing some facts with unfounded accusations, posting personal names and or adding unwarranted insults.

3. DJG received his information via members and staff permission errors. He has stated his intent and shown restraint in using pseudonyms. He was the victim of a lengthy coordinated hate campaign and is clearing his name.

4. As far as I know, there is only one person in the SB community that wants SBFII destroyed and that is the cyber-bully cyber-stalker known as WalkerD, Mark Conner, Orgonon, Willson, and many many other names.

A Few comments

Every so often I have to stick in a brief post so we don't get such big comment pile-ups that we can't tell which person or post the commenters are responding to.  So this post is meant for that purpose.  Just a few additional housekeeping items:  We can and do delete a very few comments for specific reasons.  One is unsubstantiated accusations made against other fans, (not the blog owners) especially if their real or screen names are used.  We've deleted 2 posts on that basis, but just wanted to let you know the reason.

Anonymice who hide behind proxies (mice in cat's clothing?) in order to harass and attack others without evidence will not have their comments posted.  You got something negative to say, state your name, and show your reasons. We don't need  ninja mice.

 Disagreement is to be expected, but it can be done respectfully.  Which brings to mind something I was not aware of.  The term "ElseWhere"  (or EW) is apparently considered pejorative by some fans at SBFII, including those not involved in the current conflicts.  I apologize if I have offended any of them by using it here.

If you don't trust a site or the site owners, do not visit that site. Period. With or without a proxy, data is mined. You are not as private as you may want to believe that you are. Some proxy services (particularly free services) are used by spammers, scammers and other criminals. Be careful. The laws permit some online exposures of personal information. It is permitted for exposing malfeasance. Many companies and people have access to data online. Your ISP, your Host provider, web owners, your email provider, chat, email and forum participants. If your purpose is noble, why is there such a need for hiding your identity? When someone insists that you not tell anyone about who they are, what you talk about, and holds secret meetings - BE SUSPICIOUS.

Open letter To Anonymous

Dyebat and I had no control over intentional and coordinated attacks and distractions at the other forum. But we do here. So, please stop 'secretly' and cowardly trying to provoke us. We aren't taking the bait. We are kinda busy. And focused. Why won't you comment with your name? What are you so afraid of? This blog is only for people that want to hear our side of the story. You need  not spend hours here every day. Perhaps you can find more productive activities elsewhere?

Open Message to Kalua and his 'Croonies'

Your paranoia is tiring.

Please stop the 'cloak and dagger' shenanigans.

No one in the Susan Boyle online community other than yourselves wants to perpetuate the 'toxic' climate. Knudt and Citroenlady invited any and all to their new site and they meant it. The only exception is the cyber-stalker/bully and he has been caught and removed as necessary. One Board Member and a Staff Member from your site and members from various sites have joined and all have been warmly welcomed.

I realize that you do not understand the 'amnesty' that is happening there, nor what 'transparency' means. Perhaps you no longer realize that adults from various viewpoints can have civil discussions without the need for censorship. Fans can belong to multiple sites without being your enemy.

Stop sending 'spies' around to join various sites to collect 'information' to use for spreading misinformation and paranoia.

Dani, stop slinking around trying to hack your way to the posts and pm's. Just sign up and join and come in the front door to copy/paste all you need to try and continue your dramas and defamation of people.

We don't want to spend our time tracking and preventing your sick games.

Why don't you all try and make your forum the best forum possible for your members? Spend your time getting to know your members and letting them get to know you.

Rebuild your own community from a place of mutual respect and tolerance. Stop trying to destroy ours.

Understand that you have no powers outside of your own site and gullible group of 'croonies'.

Especially now as we are all working together to find the truth.

Because, there are actually more than '5 people' that care to know what really happened. A lot more.

Call me if you are ready to talk.

Thank You

I would like to thank the administrators at susan-boyle.com for finally removing my name from the membership list, a month after I resigned.  More on the latest purges later.  Meanwhile,  please check out other websites listed here, where freedom of speech is generally encouraged.


Dyebat and I would also like to thank Knudt for her time spent diligently investigating the July incident to get to the truth of what happened. There is still no public retraction stating that Dyebat, CL and I were not involved in any attempt to remove Staff or take over the site. The Board report still stands. Given these latest attempts to cover-up Staff/Member involvement, and the continued defamation - we will now provide access to all of our data to Knudt so that she can continue.  Stay tuned.

The Clueless and the Culpable or What Happens when Financial Transparency Goes Out the Window

The Clueless and the Culpable

or

What Happens when Financial Transparency Goes Out the Window

Recent threads at the forum-susan-boyle.com have been so full of errors as to make this old bookkeeper gnash her teeth.  I’m going to correct some of them here, in the hope that the poor souls who are trying to make some sense out of the financial situation have some idea of what’s going on.

I resigned because the staff broke the agreement they made prior to the auction, which was for me to provide financial accountability, while they got the majority of seats and the director’s position on the Board.  When the staff—one or more administrators and one or more technical people—locked ALL of the financial team out of the financial accounts while I was in the midst of doing the Paypal entries, I could no longer guarantee that accountability.  This was a critical issue because staff has since provided false information regarding the Paypal accounts and their use.

The most blatant false statement was made by a techie who is a nurse by profession, not a bookkeeper.

Just as it would not be appropriate for me to give a patient an injection, it is inappropriate for her to make a statement concerning bookkeeping, particularly when it is untrue.  She stated that the Paypal account was not to be used for donations for operating expenses or loan repayment, and the donations were only small amounts of $7 or $8.   The records from Paypal show that the very first donation made was for $50, and was specifically designated for operating expenses by the donor.   From the beginning this was a concern for both lchris and myself, but the staff refused to allow lchris to modify the software to distinguish between the two types of donations, thereby commingling funds.  The lockout, and subsequent denial of what actually happened, appears to be a cover-up for this error by people who don’t know (or perhaps don’t care) squat about accountability.

Major pronouncements have been made by staff who are not even citizens of the United States, let alone knowledgeable about accounting,  concerning US tax law regarding non-profits.  Donations can be made to any corporation, whether it is for profit or not.  If the corporation is not tax-exempt, and the  income is more than the expenses, then taxes will need to be paid.  If there is $1000 left after expenses at the end of the year, then 15% of that, or $150, would be due in taxes.  It doesn’t make any difference whether it comes from ads or donations.  Ad money isn’t refused because you have to pay taxes on it.  Then why should donation money be refused for that reason?   In fact it was not refused.  That is a fiction.  It was accepted, and if it was used as a donation to a charity to impress Susan Boyle, then it was misappropriated.  If it is still sitting there, then it is up to the members who made the donations, NOT THE STAFF OR THE BOARD, to decide where they want their money to go.

Much of the confusion could have been avoided by inviting me to all meetings in which finances were discussed, as none of the Board members or staff, including the Treasurer, are bookkeepers.  This is normal for the NPO’s I have been associated with.  (Assuming finances were ever discussed.  The content of my reports shows up in the minutes just recently released, but since the Board never gave any feedback on them to me or the members, I don’t know if they were discussed or not.)

The site IS generating income.  At the beginning of November and again at the beginning of December I recommended to the Board that we began repaying our loans because we had sufficient funds to do so after expenses—about $345 at the end of November, and at least twice that by now.  In addition there was a surplus of over $700 in the Paypal account, and more than $450 of unused loan funds.  The staff loans are very small (some less than $100) and several could have been paid off by now, or partial payments could have been made to the larger lenders.  The Secretary, unfortunately is as inaccurate in her statements about finances as she is in her Board minutes.  There is absolutely no documentation that the staff has “paid off” the members who donated on their behalf.  All they have done is add their little portion to the larger amount their anonymous donor has contributed.  Again, staff had absolutely no right to donate the excess Paypal funds to Susan’s charity since some of those funds were intended for another purpose.  Clulessness or culpability on the part of the staff?  That is for the forum members to decide.

God help the new bookkeeper.