The Man who would be King

"Jan, the only one DICTATING options is YOU. Look in the mirror"

"How can you NOT see that YOU are inserting your options like a dictator!"

Nancy Lieder

Board Meeting July 27, 2003

Session Start: 18:12 UTC Sun Jul 27, 2003

(Brent) OK, shall we kick off the meeting?
(Brent) I call the meeting to order
(Brent) Item 1 minutes of the last meeting. Comments?
(NancyL) None here.
(Mary) none here
(Roger) none
(Jan) None
(Brent) OK, the minutes are ratified as correct. let the record show that
(Brent) Jan's requested entry of discussion - tt-inc vs tt lists will be discussed as item 4.
(Jan) Thanks, Brent
(Brent) Item 2 Treasurers report......Nancy?
(NancyL) I put what I had to say in the Agenda, hope everyone had a chance to read.
(NancyL) Simply stated, last year 2Q the CPA firm gave us a third bookkeeper, who needed turnover and as a result, my nomal time frame for getting the paperwork to her did not suffice.
(NancyL) So 2Q was 1Q Balance Sheet, adjusted for any activity.
(Jan) I have a few comments on the report in the agenda.
(NancyL) As it turns out, I would not have gotten the paperwork anyway, as when I turned over 3Q to them to update the Quickbooks, I did not get the 3Q or the 2Q, tho requested this several times.
(Jan) 1, The brief 1Q report was never accepted by the board. On the contrary, we asked for a full report the next meeting.
(NancyL) No phone calls returned, and the bookkeeper said it was all in the CPA persons office being reviewed, but not returned.
(NancyL) We had budgeted $1,000 for end of year, as the prior EOY took $900 to finalize (and this included sorting out turnover from Ron Darby, who had different methods then Wegner).
(NancyL) We had budgeted $150/Q for normal updates.
(NancyL) I got billed a small amount for the 2Q and 3Q ($75 each, as I recall).
(NancyL) Given that I was working full time and the activity was low and it was apparent that we were NOT going to have to report to the IRC ($25K required for that) or get audited by Wisconsin ($100K as donations required for that) I simply held off.
(NancyL) MOST small nonprofits do NOT have a CPA, which was said to me when we employed Wegner, as the costs outweigh the value added.
(NancyL) We did so because of Julia Dula donations on top of others, which looked like a curve up.
(NancyL) This curve has now flattened.
(Brent) Nancy - IRC=IRS
(NancyL) Questions?
(Jan) I'll hold the rest of my comments to after the report (I took the "hope everyone had a chance to read") as an opener for discussion. Sorry
(Jan) Did you catch my comment no. 1, posted a bit too early while you were doing your report? Any comments?
(NancyL) Given that, since most bookkeeping is balancing on either side of the ledger, I just provided the basics - Bank Balance, Accounts Payable and Receivable, committements/obligations, and the like.
(NancyL) Since our activity is so low, this is easy to do.
(NancyL) Yes, IRS
(NancyL) Jan, I'm not sure if the Board asked for that YOU did, there was no vote as the Minutes reflect.

[Notice the use of caps to emphasise the "Jan" personal issue.]
(NancyL) I may be mistaken.
(NancyL) I have this material at hand, BRB
(Brent) Jan - I see no problem with the previous reports, especially give the low activity, and the small amount of money we are working with.
(Roger) I also believe this level of accounting is sufficient given the our current operating modes.
(NancyL) Jan, this may have been YOU comment but no Board vote, this is per the Jan 26, 2003 Minutes.

[And here it is again.....]
(Jan) I agree that the amount now is small, but should we not do a proper Annual Report for 2002?
(NancyL) And as I stated in the Agenda, the mode of having LESS than a Balance Sheet, Profit & Loss etc is in precedence.
(Jan) From the minutes of saif meeting:
(Jan) Agenda Item 3: Treasurer's Quarterly Report - Report
(Jan) - There were no particular comments on this report, except that people await full-blown report, probably to be delivered next meeting.
(NancyL) This was accepted at the end of 2001, as well as 3Q and 4Q 2002, with no objection from the Board.
(Jan) saif = said
(NancyL) I am looking at the Agenda, pardon. But nevertheless, this was not a Board edict. It was to document your expectation.
(Brent) Jan - does it really matter NOW? We are about to discuss the future of the nonprofit in the next item - the level of book keeping given the small amount of money seems to be appropriate, and I see no aojection from the rest of the board.
(NancyL) We would have to spend $$ I feel, to get Wegner to create a certified report. I had gotten a letter from them earlier in 2002 compaining that we were not coming back for a "Final" report from them, just the "Draft", and that no audit was behind the numbers being submitted.
(Jan) And if this was me only (which it was not), that would not matter, since it is my duty as the Internal Auditor to oversee the work of the Treasurer.
(NancyL) Audits cost several thousands of dollars, and getting an "Final" as well as a "Draft" would involve employing the CPA, not just the bookkeeper.
(Jan) The Minutes do not state this as my concern only, but a matter of fact what the board expects
(NancyL) So do you want to spend thousands for that comfortable feeling, Jan?
(NancyL) Officialy, the Annual Report is what we give to State of Delaware each year for $20.
(Jan) Brent, it most definitely matters if the nonprofit is to change operation and/or terminate.
(NancyL) This includes reaffirming that we have not issued stock, whom to Board Members are, etc.
(NancyL) State of Wisconsin has a form to fill out, Brent familiar with this, mostly they are looking to see if people with a felony record are soliciting funds.
(Brent) According to the current report, we have $1874.00 cash left, and dropping, no donations coming in. This is a moot point.
(NancyL) Again, $15 each year.
(Brent) Or, I should say, a moot discussion.
(NancyL) THIS is the Annual Report!
(NancyL) The items on the web, which I did in the early years, were for public consumption to attract donors, not an official requirement.
(Jan) Total assets as of December 31, 2001, were USD 13.846. Don't we need to report the usage of the ~USD 12.000, and our current assets?
(NancyL) I should point out that to be pristine with CPA firm and all would be to spend WAY more each Q than we have been taking in? The logic there?
(Roger) If the inc is to terminate, we could need a final, certified report; however, if we chose to continue operating, there would be no circumstance for certified records.
(NancyL) Jan, if one reads the log, it would be apparent that YOU, then as now, were the main fuss budget.

[....and again....]
(NancyL) Jan, you are putting the cart before the horse! You are ASSUMING a change in direction, to your directives, I might add!

[You, you, you.... its all about you!.....]
(Jan) Nancy, this has nothing to do with logic. We are accepted as a non-profit by the IRS, and we need to operate properly in accordance with laws and regulations as well as our own bylaws
(NancyL) Jan, have you nothing to do with your time, that you assume others should be busy with trivial busy work?
(Roger) Jan, do our bylaws require a certified public accounting?
(Jan) Nancy, I am the Internal Auditor. This is no fuss, but the role for which I am elected

[Think that might be in reference to Jan's own preparations, or should I say lack of them.]
(NancyL) You want me to keep up with the USD compared to the Euro, on a daily basis, perhaps, for NO reason!!!
(Brent) Jan - WE have been! reread above comments! WE are operating within the laws of Wisconsin & Deleware.

[Now even Brent's at it, emphasising "we" to single himself from Jan's opinion. Good for you Brent, nothing like a bit of sucking up to the boss.]
(Jan) Roger, not as far as I remember, but it does give the precise definition of our Annual Report, date for when it should be available etc.
(NancyL) Jan, the IRS does not want to even hear from us unless we receive $25 K in a year, that's a fact!
(NancyL) YOUR interpretation of what is proper and everyone else's is different.

[...and again...]
(NancyL) The IRS most certainly, nor the State of Wisconsin, nor Delaware, do NOT expect a CPA certified report nor even a CPA in the background.
(Jan) Nancy, then what if they need to do another review of our non-profit status as they did recently? Can we just stop doing the required work just because there may still be a pole shift at an unknown date?
(NancyL) They were surprised we had one, in fact.
(Brent) Jan- The annual report HAS been submitted to State of Wiconsin. Write them for a copy.
(NancyL) Rog, no CPA required by any stretch.
(Jan) Why then have I not seen such a report?
(NancyL) Jan, another review is not scheduled for 3-5 years.
(NancyL) And this past review did NOT required anything from a CPA!
(Jan) Nancy, I have made no requirements for a CPA, only the annual report which our bylaws state.
(NancyL) Jan, I sent you a copy last summer, summer of 2002, open the big envelope I sent to you. Copy also to Shirley and Brent.
(Brent) Jan - the review of nonprofit status by the state happens occasionally - forms are filled out and sent in - period. That was done, no problem.
(Jan) Brent, if an Annual Report exists, why hasn't it been reported to the board?
(Jan) Nancy, how can an en
(NancyL) Jan, what the Annual Report is, is not delineated! Not specified! YOU are assuming it is what was done in the early years, through yet another of those things I did with my endless hours, for the web site.
(Jan) velope from summer of 2002 contain an annual report for 2002?
(NancyL) This is NOT what is officially interpreted to be an Annual Report. Officially it is what we just discussed.
(Brent) Jan - as I said above: annual report required by the state. Forms fill out and sent in. No problem.
(NancyL) I made a copy of all those form and sent them to the officers, as Shirley and Brent will affirm.
(NancyL) Delware is normally done in the Spring, and Wisconsin mid-summer.
(Jan) Article 7, Records, Section 5, Annual Report. Should I list the items the tresurer should provide?
(NancyL) I think I skipped sending in the form for Delaware this Spring, but it was a virtual copy of the previous years. I can't tell you how skimpy this is, 1/4 of a page, total.
(Jan) Still need to be done.
(Jan) need = needs
(NancyL) Does it say converting USD to Euro in there?

[This is obviously part of some private conversation concerning Euro's as Nancy keeps on mentioning it for no reason. Probably some attempt to embarrass him in some way.]
(NancyL) Does it say the VP should have his priorities straight, and not spend more than the corporation takes in on bookkeeping?
(Jan) Nancy, why do you keep on bringing up irrelevant info? Please do your duties as the TT Inc treasurer!
(NancyL) Other than a vendeta against me, as the ZetaTalk author, is there any point to what Jan is doing?

[Vendetta? Now why should Jan have a vendetta against Nancy? Guess this shows the paranoia only too well.]
(Jan) That VP is also the Internal Auditor, remember?
(NancyL) I move that this 2Q discussion be closed, as Jan will be here for hours requiring the unrequired.
(Brent) Jan - we are within the law as far as the annual report and treasurers reports are concerned. You are the only one worried about any misstep, or phantom legal action from outside. There is no money of consequence, Nancy has not gotten rich from anyof this, as the official records show that are linked off of the nonprofit webpage. Lets move on!
(Roger) I second Nancy's motion.
(Brent) Shirley seconds Nancys motion
(Brent) Let the record show that the board is in agreement to move on, except Jan.
(Brent) Item 3 Future of the nonprofit. Comments?
(NancyL) I would like to ask whether this has been thrown out, formally, to the nonprofit membership on tt-inc, for ideas.
(Jan) As I have requested this item, and listed the options, I see no need to repeat them, but would like to hear comments from others.
(Roger) Well, not exactly.
(NancyL) It seems to me we are discussing only JANS feelings, and push back to this.

[Nancy's getting worried now in case the membership should be influenced towards Jan's main proposal of changing the TT-INC. If she's lucky and can confuse them as she did with the tt-takeover vote-call she can shift things her way.]
(Mary) Not that I know of.
(NancyL) This is not the creative way to move forward, in the event there is no pole shift as many signs indicate there will be.
(Jan) It was sent to the TT Inc list, including a comment that members were invited to comments. If I remember correctly, only one member did so.
(NancyL) It should be a LIST of options, not just Jan's, from the membership, as it may be that the BEST ideas have not even been aired.

[But there are only two real options, keep it or disband. Everything else are just decisions concerning alternatives of those two.]
(Roger) I have heard comments, privately, from a few members suggesting that continuing to conduct business with a change of mission statement would be agreeable.
(Jan) Nancy, there may be a pole shift in a month, a decade or a century
(Brent) It should be noted that Jan's comments were ADDED to agenda item 3 only. Item 3 was carried over from last meeting originally.
(Jan) Nobody seems to know, including you.
(NancyL) This is not a dictatorship. We have heard from the current President and VP, and a major donor who was anonymous at the time.

[Yet that didn't concern her during the tt-takeover when Jan, also TT-INC called for the current moderators dismissal.]
(NancyL) None of these bodies wants to can the works.
(NancyL) But my point is, what about the voice not yet heard, the membership! What are THEIR ideas? Have we asked for such ideas? I believe not.
(Mary) What would be the short term objectives to the Inc. if we continue on? The booklet? No information is still being gathered.
(NancyL) Jan, asking for comments on YOUR ideas is not the same thing as asking for ideas. Not at all. Many do not want to engage you as your agenda is clear.

[His agenda? Now what could that be I wonder?]
(Mary) I truely do not see any reason for the inc. to continue. The lists are seperate and can be taken over by volunteers if wanted.
(Roger) The last two projects would be the carry through projects: the booklet and the seed stock.
(Brent) Shirley says: I'm not sure the membership will respond. They don't even vote in the elections!

[So the membership doesn't vote in the elections yet these guy's are elected year after year. Who votes them in? That must mean they're voting for themselves only, what a joke.]
(NancyL) The term Troubled Times certainly fits the times, weather impacting crops (seed for familys), quake upsurge and insurance co about to go broke (families homeless and needing temporary shelter) and (more)
(NancyL) increasingly cell phones and TV reception going out (need short wave), etc.

[But what about your planet Nancy? It would seem everyone has conveniently forgotten.]
(Brent) Shirley says: I am inclined to agree with Mary. I see no reason for the INC. to continue.
(NancyL) So, with a simple change of eliminating 2003 and pole shift, you are ON TARGET.

[See Nancy wants to continue without PX and the 12th Planet, while Jan want's to continue along with the removal of Nancy and the Zetas. What a bunch of hypocrites and after insisting everyone give up their lives to believe in PX and the Zetas.]
(Mary) With the monies left, the booklets could be sent out free again and the seeds until the money is gone.
(Jan) I think Shirley is right. Activity on the TT Inc list (of 38 members only) seems to be rather limited. Since I am not a moderator of that list, I cannot see how many actually receive the postings and how many are e-mail only
(Roger) That was the point that came out in the last meeting.
(NancyL) There are UNIX servers that can serve in many capacities, list serves and web hosting and the like.
(Roger) A change (or deletion) of the date and possibly a change in wording concerning the pole shift and then it business as usual.
(NancyL) My point is, has this been discussed, or opened for discussion, to the membership? NOT in the form of heres-what-Jan-thinks-say-otherwise but truly open ended discussion, creative thinking!

[She's definitely pushing the "Jan agenda" issue.]
(Mary) Can anyone confirm that there was a posting regarding this?
(Roger) No, not really Nancy. There is a fear, I think, of admitting one's feelings on the official list.

[Because Nancy will stomp all over them, is what Roger means. Just like she's doing now with Jan for disagreeing with her.] 
(Brent) We can throw it out to the membership, but I agree with Mary & Shirley - we have a lethargic membership.
(Jan) Nancy, my last posting on this topic was a to-the point, all options open, as is regularily done in normal businesses. If anybody has a personal agenda here, I think everybody would agree that is ..... (guess who?)
(NancyL) Where is the current weather heading? Japan and Russia both had 7+ today, and a Russian volcano exploded where it was considered "green' only yesterday.

[Here she goes trying to prove the mythical planets existence, when no one can see it anywhere.]
(Roger) Especially with postings such as Jan's that seem to show an alternate agenda.

[Another one voicing his opinion to the existence of there being an alternative "Jan agenda." Poor Jan nobody loves him.]
(NancyL) 500+ tornadoes in the US so far this year, twice any other annual average.
(NancyL) I certainly think what to DO with the nonprofit is not a Board decision.
(NancyL) The Bylaws state that any change that affects the membership must be put BEFORE the membership.
(NancyL) Are these not people with brains? Do they not earn their membership from contributions, creative contributions?
(Jan) Of course this can be a board decision. However, if we so chose, we may ask the membership.
(NancyL) We requires something of THEM before they can be included in the membership, not just pointing to a book or web site, not just quoting another, but some effort from THEM.
(Jan) The bylaws state nothing about a possible termination
(NancyL) Thus, with this membership, we are going to be arrogant and DICTATE what will become of what they have put their time and thought into?

[Now Nancy's agreeing Jan is a dictator. So why is he still head moderator of the tt-groups? I notice how her opinion changes when it suits though. There was no disagreement during the tt-takeover. No mention of Jan being a dictator then.]
(Mary) Shirley can send out an election notice giving the tree options we are considering.
(Mary) tree=three
(Mary) Time limit of 1 week or such.
(Jan) Nancy, is your strategy here to silence everybody with a different opinion? Why not let the others speak, and you and I quite down?
(Jan) quite = quiet
(NancyL) Jan, you asked the membership for their opinion, or did you list YOUR options and ask for their opinion on THAT?
(Mary) If there is no majority, ie, 37 members and only 4 votes, then the board decides with their votes.
(Jan) Nancy, if you read the posting, you would see that I listed all three alternatives, with the pros and cons I could see.
(NancyL) Wrong, Jan, for someone claiming to stick to the Bylaws, you have missed it! The Bylaws state that any change affecting the membership requires they be included!
(NancyL) Jan, read Memberhip, rights.
(Brent) Nancy: we all agree that SERIOUS earth changes are upon us, and intensifying every day. And the independent TT lists reflect this. I'm just not sure that the nonprofit will be serving a purpose - BUT the lists will. Besides, we have no donations coming in, and are running out of money - the nonprofit will be broke soon.

[See Brent wants to continue the tt-groups but not necessarily with the TT-INC.]
(NancyL) I think that Brent should send out a request for open discussion on options, collect them, and THIS list should be what is voted upon by the membership!
(NancyL) That is the way it was done in the past, not dictatorship, but true democracy.
(Jan) Nancy, Article / Section please
(NancyL) Jan, the only one DICTATING options is YOU. Look in the mirror

[Now a definite personal attack.]
(Roger) When the nonprofit is broke, we cease operations until more donations come in. If we use the resources we have remaining and try to get this booklet into the hands of the public, as was/is our mission, then we will have done all we can do.
(NancyL) Jan, for Heaven's sake! YOUR options are not the ideas of the membership! How can you NOT see that YOU are inserting your options like a dictator!

[And again.]
(NancyL) Did you collect ideas from the membership? NO. You said these are the 3, now vote!
(Roger) We can change the mission statement to remove the 2003 and/or poleshift and even change a few pages here and there in the booklet.
(Brent) Roger - have we had many booklet requests lately?
(Roger) There have been less than a dozen in the last month. I stopped sending the booklet out for free and have had no forwards from Nancy indicating payment.
(NancyL) Jan, click on Membership, and read, not hard to do.
(Jan) I have just checked Article 8, Membership, and the word "rights" is not even mentioned
(Roger) I believe the date and the poleshift tie-down is the impedement to continuing distribution of the booklet.
(NancyL) Brent, the PO Box has been virtually empty, but this is due to the missed dates re pole shift, I feel. This does not mean that by end of year the nonprofit cannot be a renewed and very active entity!

[End of the year? What about Planet X Nancy?]
(Brent) Roger - could be, but even if we alter the date, will we still get requests for it? TT's credability has been dropping steadly since May......
(Jan) If you refer to Section 8, referendums, I do not see anything implied that a membership vote has to be done.
(NancyL) Jan, the Bylaws state that any Board decision affecting membership rights has to be put before the membership. YOU don't think democraticaly, but dictatorial. I am suggesting that to insist members have a creative contribution before they can attain membership, and then ignore them for the KEY decision, is wrong.
(Jan) Text, please?
(Roger) Well, the nonprofit has not made any changes to reflect the missed date. We need to decide what we will do and then ADVERTISE it!
(NancyL) Just as you assume the nonprofit owns the volunteer tt lists, you are assuming you can make decisions for these folks.
(NancyL) If the pole shift does not happen, but troubled times continue to escalate, then the nonprofit may find itself, reclothed, very much in demand!
(Brent) OK, lets throw this out to the membership. I will but together an offical email, and we will give it a week for voteing.
(Jan) Just for the record, the statement in question from the Bylaws is: "Such a referendum may only occur when the membership is twarted by the Board, which has refused to take action on a matter."
(Brent) but=put
(Mary) I second Brent's motion.
(NancyL) Jan, you didn't find "rights" in the Membership article? I found it twice.
(NancyL) I second Brent's motion.
(Jan) the word twart was not found by Dictionary.com. Thwart equals either
(Jan) 1, To prevent the occurrence, realization, or attainment of: They thwarted her plans. Or
(Jan) 2, To oppose and defeat the efforts, plans, or ambitions of.
(Roger) Jan, what are you talking about?
(NancyL) Article 10, Amendments '(a) by approval of the Board of Directors unless the Bylaw amendment would materially and adversely affect the rights of members, if any, as to voting or transfer, pending approval by the membership;
(Mary) Also, if no discussion is activated by the request, the board shall have final say on the future of the Inc.
(Brent) Jan! STOP QUOTEING THE DICTIONARY! Do you agree with my motion above?

[Now Brent's dictating, what a laugh. (Ban him Brent like you do with those who disagree with you on the tt-groups. Ah but you can't can you? How frustrating for you.)]
(Mary) or something like that .
(Jan) Roger, the alleged part of our bylaws which Nancy claims we have to put such a decision in front of the membership.
(NancyL) Brent, what are you going to do with the options? Put them before the membership? For a vote?
(Jan) Brent, if another board member maqkes an incorrect claim concerning the bylaws, I think it is appropriate to correct that.
(Jan) That being said, I second your motion
(NancyL) What you put before the membership is a vote, or a request for options and ideas? Then the options get complied into a votecall? How does this proceed.
(Jan) Brent, I would suggest putting forward the 3 options
(Brent) Nancy - Yes, I will put out a request for options & ideas first, then a votecall. IF we do not receive any options or ideas, then we will proceed with the most obvious ones.
(Jan) If there are more options, they may of course be included.
(Roger) I think this decision has a tremendous effect on the membership and as such should be put before the membership. I agree with Shirley though in that we are not likely to get much response. Since our choices really do boil down to the three already mentioned (in the last meeting and in your email) perhaps we should ask for a vote on which of those courses of action we should take.
(Jan) If none fo the options receive >50%, then remove the losing option and redo the vote with the 2 remaining option.
(NancyL) Roger, my thinking and experience is that if you dictate, and assume, you will miss the best ideas?
(NancyL) Ask in an OPEN ENDED manner for all and any ideas! You will be surprised what will come forward, intimidated recently, but there!
(NancyL) Jan, how does an idea provided get 50%? It needs to be voted upon to get voted upon? All ideas proferred seriously should be listed.
(Roger) I'm certainly open to waiting for their responses.
(Jan) Asking for ideas at this time? Such ideas will be needed if the membership should decide to carry on in one form or another, as the current model seems rather dead.
(Brent) Jan - don't be silly! we will be lucky to get any interest at all! Just look at the prior votecalls for officers! Plus, I have seen very little enthusiasm on the TT-inc list of late anyway.But we will move forward with this.
(NancyL) Lose membership by asking for their opinions? The opposite is true!
(Jan) Brent, you may be right with respect to votes. I withdraw my suggestion for 2 rounds.
(NancyL) The body of Troubled Times, the web site, was built by asking for individual contributions, and this WORKS1
(NancyL) WORKS! Sorry
(Brent) Jan - my above comment was refering to >50% comment
(Roger) There is little or no enthusiasm lately because there is no guidance! We have a virtual mob out there waiting for someone to step up and lead us, is it Jan and his desire to execute the nonprofit, or is it the board of directors that will step forward?

[The "Jan agenda?" Well they seem to think so.]
(Jan) Brent, understood (that was the second round)
(NancyL) Roger, well said, Huzzah!
(Jan) Roger, you've seen the funding, engagement and overall activity lately. Who will take on the challenge to turn this around?
(Brent) Frankly, I have seen little activity from the board on the tt-inc list either!
(Jan) With the tight link to ZetaTalk, and all the lens flares, sun dogs and slowing trends, no wonder activity is low!
(NancyL) It does not need a lot of time, just the right attitude. Roger has that, in my opinion.
(NancyL) Brent :-) Good observation!
(Roger) A united board will have the power to turn around the operations of the non-profit. If funding runs out, then we settle into a mode of continuing to operate on volunteer labor, as we did in the beginning!
(Jan) But if the membership wants to carry on in one way or another, and board members are willing to step up to it, then that is of course the right thing to do.
(Brent) Jan - TT will always be linked to Zetatalk in some form.
(Roger) There are members out there that are willing to support such a mode!
(NancyL) Jan, with the tight link to ZetaTalk, which was exactly RIGHT about the earth changes and the object appearing next to the Sun even on TV photos, is WHY the nonprofit was anything at all to begin with!
(Jan) I believe Roger's suggestion on TT Inc was to continue autonomous of ZetaTalk?
(Brent) don't remember that....
(Roger) That was my original suggestion, yes. But I submit that we, Troubled Times, Inc. have always been autonomous of Zetatalk!!!

[Well you can't be both, another hypocrite playing both sides.]
(NancyL) Jan, the official nonprofit, incorporation, Bylaws, etc have ZERO to do with ZT and in fact even declare separation from the TT voluntter groups.
(NancyL) My point being, if the nonprofit members say a reason to assume a Pole Shift in 2003, given earth changes and ZT accuracy in general, then they have not been all that off the beam.
(NancyL) It is 2003, we are having the weather predicted, the inbound object photos from all over the world and on the SOHO, quake upticks, crop failures, cell phone and TV reception failures.
(NancyL) SO, the nonprofit prepared for this. If not a Pole shift, they are still on target!

[Except you predicted a pole shift and 12th planet Nancy or did you forget? anything to stay in the limelight.]
(NancyL) Now, had they followed Jan's predictions, um, I guess there weren't any, he just complains.
(Jan) Nancy, I answered Brent's point. Formally, TT Inc has never had any relationship to ZetaTalk, but it has been the main premise for our operation.
(Roger) The founders of TT, Inc. chose to place the 2003 date on the webpage and in the mission statement, but we, the current board, are not required to maintain that. This would be a change that we can vote on and do not necessarily need a votecall of the membership.
(NancyL) Rog, true, and it is NOT in the Bylaws nor the incorporation! This would be an easy change for the booklet and the web page!
(Brent) OK, we are getting off on a tangent here.....Let's throw this out to the membership as discussed, and see what happens. Any objections/comments?
(Roger) Our premise has been that the upcoming earth changes will take the form of a pole shift that is likely to occur in 2003. This was supported by earth-based/human sources, not just Zetatalk!
(NancyL) I think it is qualified, anyway, in the nonprofit. The TT volunteer group DID formally vote on the home page, to base it on 2003.
(NancyL) I have no futher comments, Brent.
(Mary) Brent, just make sure you let them know there is a dealine to respond and that their opinion will determine the fate of the Inc.
(Roger) Exactly Nancy! We can make that change today and perhaps should have two months ago!
(Jan) Neither have I
(NancyL) Bt the way, I just got a call on the other line from Kansas City KQRC, will be on the air with them tomorrow morning 7:30 Central.
(Jan) Mary, was that deaDline?
(Mary) oh, yea, sorry
(Roger) KQRC, what station number is that?
(Jan) No problem, Mary. Just needed to be sure I understood the meaning :-)
(NancyL) I'd have to check my records, file upstairs, sorry. I will email you!
(Brent) Yes Mary - I will include the week deadline.
(Brent) I will take care if this today, and get the ball rolling!
(Brent) Any more comments on any of the agenda items?
(Jan) Good, Brent. Do we need a formal vote? (I did second your motion to put this before the membership)
(Brent) No formal vote needed as what we are doing is already in the bylaws.
(NancyL) I would suggest, since there has been discussion on what is to occur, that you restate and ask for a vote, yes.
(Roger) The president (or chairman of a board) cannot make a motion.
(Jan) Then I make the motion that we put the future of the Inc before the membership for a membership vote
(Jan) Any second?
(Brent) Roger - true, but I made no official motion, everyone just treated it as such.
(Mary) I will second that motion.
(Roger) I know, just stating the obvious (to you and me)
(Brent) Roger - OK :-)
(NancyL) Roger, I did not save this, sorry! KQRC in Kansas City! Morning radio show.
(Brent) People, as i said - if it states in the bylaws already that we need a membership vote, we do NOT need to vote now!
(NancyL) I move we place a request for options before the membership, to be followed by a vote on such options.
(Brent) It's just in the record that we are proceeding with membership discussion & vote.
(Jan) Brent, I am not certain about that interpretation of the amendments. I suggest a vote
(NancyL) Jan, since it was agreed in discussion that it would be an open discussion, then a votecall on the options, this should be stated as such!
(Mary) I think Jan's right, this makes sure that it is understood by all the board what we are proceeding to do.
(NancyL) Brent, I guess I am happy if the Minutes reflect your summary statement!
(Brent) So in summary:
(Jan) I object to Nancy's motion. We DO NOT need to ask for options, we have them already!
(Brent) We will propose options to the membership regarding the future of the nonprofit, then
(Brent) do a votecall after their options and suggestions are collected.
(NancyL) Jan, we have YOUR options, not theirs.
(Jan) What other options can there be? Continue as now, continue with a different mission, or terminate?
(NancyL) Brent, are we proposing options to START with, or being open ended and asking for ideas, options, etc etc?
(NancyL) If you state option, then ask for their opinion, you will get the same silence you have been getting, my opinion.
(Roger) I agree, Jan, that it appears these are the only options, but there may be a 4th one we are overlooking...
(NancyL) Jan, if you LISTEN instead of dictate, you may discover them!
(Jan) Roger, wouldn't any such options be just HOW to continue, if that is the selected choise?
(Roger) Brent's original assertion was to solicite ideas and options for the future of the inc. Jan's motion didn't detail that.
(Brent) I am proposing both - we have the 3 basics (which are very basic), and ask the membership the add to or comment on in addition.
(NancyL) In an open ended discussion, you don't assume any outcome, just IDEAS!
(Roger) Jan, Perhaps, but a good manager is willing to listen to redundent iterations of the same choice.
(Roger) redundent = redundant
(NancyL) Brent, they have already been apraised of the 3 options, as Jan has been holding forth.
(Roger) The speaker then has a chance to freely voice an opinion and there is always the possibility that you have overlooked another option.
(NancyL) Why not state that since one of the premises for the nonprofit, a pole shift in 2003, seems delayed of iffy, but many other premises hold true today, WHAT should the nonprofit be doing, what should its mission be, or any change in direction be?
(Jan) Roger, agreed. However, it will of course be possible for you and others to post your ideas about how such a changed mission & operation could be carried out.
(Brent) OK, I will ask for further input and ideas for the membership, building on the previous basic options.
(NancyL) VERY open ended. You are still giving them the conclusion, NOT asking for ideas!
(NancyL) I can state for one member that I heard from today, that they do not feel the tt-inc is open whatsoever to ideas, and assume the Board runs things, that membership has no voice whatsoever!
(Jan) Nancy, divide and concour? Do you honestly think you will get any sensible input from that, or is this just another move to drag it out?
(NancyL) Not the the Bylaws state at all!
(Roger) Brent, please don't restate the previous options. We need to hear the multiple iterations of the options too!
(Mary) I dissagree, restate the previous options and ASK for other options.
(Brent) OK, I will not state restate the original options. I will appeal the the membership for new ideas & direction only.
(NancyL) Jan, do you honestly thing ANYONE but you as a dictator can accomplish anything? What do you accomplish? Certainly not building TT web site, the volunteer group. Here's what Jan dictates!
(NancyL) Yeah, sure.
(Roger) The other options have already been stated, and are quite obvious. To restate them is to further bludgeon the membership with the choice, not to solicite their input.
(NancyL) Brent :-) Got my applause!
(NancyL) Roger, Huzzah!
(Jan) Nancy, stop being personal, and try to behave as a professional. Do not disgrace the Inc with your unprofessional behaviour, please!
(Jurian) lol, coming from you, that's a funny statement

[It's Jurian Van der Knapp poking his useless nose in again.]
(NancyL) Personal? And what is "just another vote to drag it out?"
(Mary) But even I don't remember when the options were presented. I'm not going to push this, I withdraw my request.
(Brent) Remember, we are still officially meeting, and all this is part of the log, (except any nologs).
(Roger) Mary, Jan's email listed the options and the pros and cons for each option. It was a well written email and didn't appear to have too much bias for any one option. Unfortunately it didn't leave much opening for discussion.
(Mary) Roger, just don't remember...... must not have made a very deep impact on this old brain.
(Jan) Roger, I think Brent's and Mary's suggestions were good. List the options so far, and ask if there are any other options to be considered.
(NancyL) It's like stating the options for lunch are chicken sandwich or egg roll, so vote. If this is closed, then you don't hear from the folk who want bean soup, salad, etc etc they just remain silent and uninvolved!
(Jan) That should give a starting point, but not tie anybody down
(Roger) My point is that the options have already been presented.
(Roger) "Starting points" inveribly define "directions." What we need is free thinking or brain storming of ideas!!!!
(NancyL) If Brent states his opening volly to the membership that he is looking for FRESH ideas, not just the ones discussed or presented already, or more options on the ones presented already, then it will be OK.
(NancyL) Folks will slip their foot in the door, tentatively, and peek around, and clear their throats.
(Brent) I will expect the board to be as active in this tt-inc Options/vote, as you have been in this meeting today! many times we have talked about activity and discussion on the tt-inc list, and then none of the board show up.

[Perhaps they're all still in their trenches waiting for the pole shift nancy predicted for May 15th.]
(Jan) I don't care how this is being presented. Anybody interested (if there are any left) can just check today's log and see how dysfunctional the current board has become.
(Roger) Just don't reference the options...ie, "Jan's previously presented options" or restate them.
(Jan) Brent, do whatever you like, but let's get on with this!
(NancyL) Jan, like checking for the USD against the Euro, daily, as a proper function for the Treasure :-)
(NancyL) Brent, I will certainly be checking in daily!
(Jan) Nancy, I have never ever asked for any USD to EUR conversion. Please try to keep focused on the issues at hand!
(Brent) OK, on that note, I will proceed with the composition of the email for the membership, and present it today. Keep in mind that is is only 10:00 am where I am!
(NancyL) Jan, you stated, above ' Total assets as of December 31, 2001, were USD 13.846. Don't we need to report the usage of the ~USD 12.000, and our current assets?'
(Jan) And where does that state EUR?
(NancyL) Why are you referring to USD?
(Brent) Is there any objection to adjourning this meeting?
(Jan) Because that is the proper name for United States Dollar, the currency in which the Inc deals. Oh my...
(Mary) None here, Brent, if you need the log let me know.
(Roger) What about item 4?
(Jan) Brent, it may not be of interest any more, but we did have a point about the Inc vs the so-called volunteer group
(NancyL) Jan's #4 presumes a decision by the Membership, too soon, my opinion.
(Roger) That is item 4 on my list...
(Brent) Lets table that discussion shall we? Next meeting?
(NancyL) I'm for that.
(Roger) I move we table that discussion until next meeting then!
(NancyL) I second the motion.
(Jan) I do not see how Item 4 has got anything to do with this discussion, except to discuss the possible relationship and consequences if such a relationship is established
(Brent) OK, discussion tabled till next meeting.
(NancyL) Jan, check Membership Article 8, Section 3 re that. They are separate entities, only YOU have this confused!
(Jan) Nancy, given the involvement of the Inc board and the reimbursements you have received for "volunteer" work, I don't think that would hold legally
(Roger) Well, since item 4 is tabled, I move we adjourn this meeting.
(NancyL) Jan, you are AGAIN confused over the tt lists as volunteer group and the nonprofit award for work. They are separate!
(Brent) OK, the meeting is now adjourned!
Session Close: 20:08 UTC Sun Jul 27, 2003

------o------

Well what can I say? What a childish bunch of morons. Not one person mentioned the fact that the INC represents Nancy's predictions and Zetatalk, which have all failed miserably. Their only concern appears to be how they can continue with the least loss of credibility and milk the gullible for as long as possible. No wonder Clipper is already distancing himself on tt-welcome. Although its looking more and more like his group will come under attack when the complete and utter takeover of the tt-groups by the INC takes shape in one form or another.

This is starting to get interesting.

tt-moderation increase