USPA - Jan Meyer Impeachment??

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Could you not just e-mail them individually? Perhaps I'm not understanding the mechanics of what getting rid of this e-mail address does? Are their e-mail addresses not public info?

Did they lock the doors, turn out the lights, and curiously peer out the bottom corner of the front window drapes at any passerby?

If you want to get a hold of them, call them. If you want to get ignored, e-mail them. It's how most business works.

Yes I can and have e-mailed, and or called members of the BOD, but I also believe Mr. Peek about why the e-mail address was disabled and that is disturbing.

Ignoring communication may be how some businesses operate, but I can choose not to do business with them.

However when I pay dues and elect people to represent me, I DEMAND they communicate with me.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[stratostar 5]

I'm sure he'll be thrilled to know Jan & her supporters will be gone if he get's her kicked off. You guys aren't "Team Players" and only rock the boat, so good riddens.

I would rather see more stay and use their vote with their voice and make the change that is seems many posters would like to see, but I don't think it will happen.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Maybe you're right. I might need to rethink that. Althought I guess I could still be elected if not a member. I spoke of running before but stepped aside when Mike G stepped up to the plate. I'll have to give it some thought again.

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

I would rather see more stay and use their vote with their voice and make the change that is seems many posters would like to see, but I don't think it will happen.

In my letter to the BOD, I did say that I'd maintain my Individual Membership so I would retain my voting privilege.

Martin

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[chutejump 0]

Quote

Quote

Whoever got USPA into the lawsuit situation (and USPA's actions regarding Skyride were pretty indefensable from an anti-trust stance), really should be accountable for it.

I agree fully! If they voted to support the action they are guilty by association and should stand for the same action!


Jan Meyer may have been the driving force behind the removal of Individual, and Group Memberships, but it is a "Board of Directors" not a Kingdom, were it a Kingdom Glen Bangs would have to be considered the Anointed. If impeachment is how “we're” going to "hold people responsible" everyone who voted to remove the memberships should be facing impeachment. I'd suggest as well that if one is "convicted", all should be convicted. Then I'd suppose (I don't know the bylaws well enough) King Glen I is afforded the privilege of appointing replacements.

If they Impeach her I sure she should arrange counsel on her behalf and file suit against USPA for their actions!

Also, as I understand Glen Bangs is the only member of the BOD privileged to the detales of the “Skyride settlement”, and he has chosen not to share this information with the rest of the BOD. My regional director has related to me that there are often items/issues to which he as a member of the BOD is not privileged. Maybe it is a Kingdom?

This "STINKS" to high heaven! Why shouldn't the membership know? Because if you were informed you would be so pissed at the agreement and amount of your (our) money that was lost from their emotional action that there would soon be new persons running the USPA!

To my knowledge, Jan’s primary “infraction” is that she’s willing to talk with, and discuss issues with the lowly peasants (aka members), the nerve!!!

Last time I checked Freedom of speech was one of the few rights that we still had control of, seems as if USPA is committed to see this one removed also! Don't think so? Than read the ethics mumbo jumbo they have produced!

I did write my opinions to the BOD, cc to my RD, and cc to a drop zone owners email list. In that letter, I informed that If Ms. Meyer is removed from “OUR” BOD, I will remove my drop zone from the list of USPA Group Members, and make it known that Individual Membership is no longer required at my DZ.

I will forward my opinion, to the BOD an have already spoken to my RD, and "I"LL do you one better" As of now I will state that "I WILL NOT" renew my uspa group membership! I have grown sick and tired of incompetent decisions, complacency, lack of support, lack of enforcement, and the rest the the half assed actions of USPA! They say we are "Professionals" it would be much easier to do if we were to find ourselves following "Professional leadership!"

OH! by the way! Now! "You don't need no stinking USPA membership to jump at my place"

Tom Dolphin, SkydiveMRVS

• Quote

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

but I can choose not to do business with them.

And that is NOT the case the USPA. If you want to Skydive, you MUST do business with them. Most of us have no choice in this matter.

Posting here will surly do no good at all.
Going to the meeting will not help because they will dismiss the meeting for general membership. No Quorum will be present.
Emails to the Executive Committee will just be ignored.
Phone calls do not have to be answered.

What could you possibly do?? You were not even a Golden Knight so you could never be one of the real leaders.

You are just one Vote. They don’t care.

Suck it up, Bend over and let them do as they please or quit skydiving. Those are pretty much the choices, Right?

(And for the record, I am referring to the Executive Committee. I think the BOD in general DOES care about Skydivers and tries to do the best they can for the most part.)

[stratostar 5]

Spence,

Mike G can speak for himself as to how he feels about things, I won't try to speak for him, but read between the line of my post up a little. I've talked to Mike & I understand his point of view & I agree, I think he would find it a huge burden removed to have you run to hold the seat or anyone else in the region. I think he would say he would like to see all new people take back the place in one big ousting.

You can only fight the good fight for so long when out numbered.

Martin & Tom

Thanks for putting your money where your mouth is. Maybe we can hold the first burn your membership card boogie @ Tom's place, but let us first storm the castle gate just for shits and grins, be rude not too!

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[chutejump 0]

Just received a few PM's with concern for my decision! "Let me state this!"
I have no political agenda! I support the sport and the jumpers whom support it also! and have a very pointed position with regard to political correctness!

"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

"Nuff said"

Tom, SkydiveMRVS

[DSE 3]

[replyWhy don't I just send an e-mail to the whole board and ask them what the reason was, maybe they'll all give us the same legitimate reason why that e-mail address was removed. Oh, wait, I can't.

What, in your opinion, would be a source that was trustworthy enough to make a determination if that above statment is true or not?

Of course you can email the entire board. I've done it a few times. And gotten decent responses from a few of them, zero responses from others (yeah, I think they're dicks for not responding, and yes, I highly respect those that have).
Is it really so hard to click a few names? CRTL + C and CTRL + V. That's all it takes. Or APPLE +C/Apple +V if you use a Mac. Or create a custom email addy in Outlook. Or copy/paste this page
No. The word of one sitting BOD member isn't enough to convince me that the reason the email was disconnected was because "the board didn't want to hear from their constituents." Logic applies: If you don't accept what Glenn Bangs (or any other disfavored BOD member) then why should *anyone's* individual word be accepted? The whole alleged point of the impeachment action is due at least in part, to what one BOD member said without authorization from the others. Is the word of only one BOD member the word of the BOD, or of an individual?
I'm merely attempting to remain fair based on what appear to be constantly changing rules of engagement. How is it that *this* BOD member's word isn't acceptable but *that* BOD member's word isn't? Either it's all accepted or none of it is, IMO. Can't pick n' choose.
Either way, I'm not willing to go off cocked n' locked based on the very flimsy amount of information currently available.
As on person so eloquently put it in a private mail "I'm too new to know the history behind all of this." Guilty!. I'm also not naive about the politics of large representational organizations and have seen more than one situation explode due to lack of information, and felt like a fool for being on a bandwagon with only 3 wheels. So forgive me for wanting to be open-minded for the time being. I'm funny that way.

[peek 20]

Quote

What evidence do you have that the email address was removed [because some BOD members did not want to hear from members]?.

The "official" reason was that this email address listed on USPA's web site caused SPAM to be sent to the BOD, (which of course it did because all email addresses listed on web sites cause a certain amount of SPAM).

However, there was an issue (I don't recall which) that was discussed on rec.skydiving at the time that generated a large interest in comments to the BOD, so about 30 members used this email address to contact the BOD.

Those BOD members who appreciate feedback from members simply read them and made mental note of their content. (Not too much to ask, eh?)

At the next BOD meeting when this was being discussed I vividly remember Glenn Bangs referring to the emails he received that were forwarded through this email address as a "SPAM Dump".

I vividly remember it of course because of his coining of that phrase to refer to [messages from USPA members that he did not want to get].

(He was not the only BOD member who did not want to receive emails from members. It was more or less the internet-naive BOD members that were used to a contact-free existence because other methods of contact from members were not as efficient as email.)

So be careful you USPA member "spammers"!

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

(And for the record, I am referring to the Executive Committee. I think the BOD in general DOES care about Skydivers and tries to do the best they can for the most part.)

Skydivers elect the board and the board elects the executive committee... change has to start somewhere.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[AirWhore 0]

Quote

Maybe we can hold the first burn your membership card boogie @ Tom's place, !

I'm there even if it's just 1 182

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

Maybe you're right. I might need to rethink that. Althought I guess I could still be elected if not a member. I spoke of running before but stepped aside when Mike G stepped up to the plate. I'll have to give it some thought again.

Actually, you can't, Spence. There's not a lot of qualifications for the Board, but one of them is membership. Kinda makes sense since you are being elected to represent the members of a membership organization. I have no doubt that you could muster up the votes but I also have no doubt that the votes would all be disqualified if you were not a member.

From the Governance manual:

Quote

3-1.3 CANDIDATE QUALIFICATIONS
A. No USPA member will be considered as a potential
candidate for election to the board:
1. a member of USPA in good standing for not
less than one year immediately prior to the year
of candidacy
2. 18 years of age by June 1 of the year of
candidacy
B. Regional director candidates must reside in the USPA
region for which they seek election.
C. No current employees of USPA are eligible for
consideration as candidates and may not serve on the
board.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[johndh1 0]

As was stated earlier, this lawsuit was not "lost," it was "settled," and by a tiny group of people who I do not trust.
What is admirable in giving up and giving in? That is what the Executive Committee did, not "us."
Some disagree with the removal of that company and those slugs from the organization (by reason of "it's not the business of the organization to regulate business") - I am not one of those people. I do not believe that their removal was an attempt to "regulate business." I believe that the people who voted to take action in the first place did the right thing to uphold the integrity and respectability of the organizaton and its members, both current individual and groups, as well as potential future members.
What right did they have to force themselves into membership into an organization? What proof that their ouster caused them financial harm by attempted monopoly?

The very idea that they were somehow wronged by their removal is ridiculous, and it literally makes me sick to think of how this was handled. Even worse, that same few who I personally believe steered this thing into submission add insult to injury by proposing the impeachment of a well-respected, admired, and undeniably appreciated leader and member of the community (and, please, don't bore me by handing me the "but we don't know who exactly proposed the impeachment yet" line).

THEY (the plaintiffs in the suit) are the ones who have done wrong unapologetically, and THEY should not have the right to be part of this organization.

What I'd be interested in finding out is if Jan's impeachment is somehow part of the super-secret terms of the settlement - whether written or verbal.

I am firmly convinced that if handled properly, USPA would have won this lawsuit. Sure, it would have cost money, but it would have saved integrity. Be that as it may, still, to attempt to make this woman a scapegoat is a vile and dastardly deed. Shame on them. I pray that it backfires immensely.

Roll Tide Roll

[DSE 3]

Gary, my only response to that then, is that I recently ordered "[email protected]" to be disconnected, because it had become a serious spam magnet with significant impact on productivity at our business. We did not mail our software owners with the new tech support email, we merely changed it on our website.
Does this mean I didn't want to hear from my customers? Nope, quite the opposite. I wanted to cut the BS. We're a little more tech savvy than most of the BOD, based on what I've observed from them, so I find it difficult to jump to the conclusion that the email addy was discontinued simply because the "BOD didn't want to hear from members." If there were *any* evidence of a BOD member making such a stupid statement, they should be brought up short in public, immediately. All the more reason I'm in favor of BOD meetings being viewable live over the web. All these accusations, but no accountability on either side makes for a mess.
Make everyone accountable for their actions, and responsible for their statements and votes.

[packerboy 3]

I DEMAND

See, I don't think that's the best way to go about doing things either... maybe it's just me.

If you are overemotional in your communications to someone about how irrational they are, especially to someone in an elevated position, with an elevated ego, you will lose your argument 100% of the time guaranteed.

I am indifferent and uneducated about the actual position of either party here. I couldn't give two shits about what happens to Jan Meyers, or the USPA.

I can see however that on one side of the argument, people are getting a little overexcited and are not conducting themselves in a professional and effective manner. Perhaps those on the other side of the argument aren't being rational either, but I can't see that.

People need to settle down and look at the situation for what it is. It is a chance for the democracy of the organization that you have had a hand in creating to step up to the plate and test the value of it's own existence. It shall either prevail or it shall fail. But realize that this impeachment hearing is an important part of that democratic process. Someone has an argument to present, and others have an argument to dispute. Let it happen.

If you feel it means something, than by all means get involved, but forwarned that getting involved in politics is gettting in the game. Or should I just say that politics IS a game. Getting all bent out of shape because someone is playing games and decides to make it a little work for you to get involved isn't going to help anything. As a matter of fact it probably puts you a step backward (you swung and wiffed at their curveball). People don't appreciate being DEMANDED of anything (strike two).

Just do the extra work.. collect the e-mail addresses and put them in a group in your address book. If once side shall argue their point better than the other side, they will win. If they don't, well then... you know what, you elected these people, YOU screwed up when you did that. (By you, I mean the people that cared enough to vote, because if you didn't care enough to vote, it's laughable to think that you deserve your voice to be heard).

If you don't play a better game than them, you will lose. If you let you're emotions get the best of you, you will be off your game.

That DZO guy with the mustache a few posts ago that is going to get rid of his DZ membership... well he's sitting on third base.. hit him home. Good luck in your battle.

--------------------------------------------------
In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. ~ Thomas Jefferson

[divnswoop 0]

I can see how it would be frustrating to receive 30 emails a day from people complaining about stuff they know little about and 2-3 from people with educated concerns/ issues.

But they did sign up for that and that is why they get paid the big bucks!

[CSpenceFLY 1]

As I said above I may need to rethink that.

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

2-3 from people with educated concerns/ issues

I think you overestimate this number by at least 2-3!!

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Could you not just e-mail them individually? Perhaps I'm not understanding the mechanics of what getting rid of this e-mail address does? Are their e-mail addresses not public info?

Their e-mail addresses are listed in the first few pages of every single issue of "Parachutist" magazine.

Just because some group e-mail address disappeared, doesn't mean that you can't still send them mail to their individual addresses.

If you feel strongly enough to voice your opinion to each and every national board member, then you shouldn't mind typing in seven different e-mail addresses.

Here, I'll do it for you:

[email protected] (Glenn Bangs)
[email protected] (Sherry Butcher)
[email protected] (John DeSantis)
[email protected] (Larry Hill)
[email protected] (Jan Meyer)
[email protected] (Mike Mullins)
[email protected] (Jay Stokes)
[email protected] (B.J. Worth)

[peek 20]

Quote

I can see how it would be frustrating to receive 30 emails a day ....

No, no, no, no......
That was 30 emails related to a specific issue.
Probably spread over 2-3 days.

And yes, an elected official is responsible for communication with their constituency. Email makes it easy.

[stratostar 5]

Quote

"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

Well yea, it's knowing what the clean end is, thats the trick.... I think I have a new sig line.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[Amazon 7]

Quote

which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

OH...... so that is what the USPA did with Skyride.... or at least thru their delusions THINK that is what they did.

[meekerseeker 0]

Well said Martin & I echo your sentiment! I currently require USPA individual membership as we are at a municipal airport, but I will immediately work with our City to explore other options if the BOD removes Jan. I will follow your lead & remove my DZ as a group member also.

We don't need to get rid of her; we need more board members like her, with her knowledge & vision, willingness to listen and take a stand, regardless of whether or not you agree with her take on a given issue! Losing her would be a HUGE loss to the organization and the sport.

(side note: Just so you understand how vehement I am about this issue, this is only my second post ever on this forum.)

:Jen Sharp, DZO
Skydive Kansas

[CSpenceFLY 1]

I was thinking the same thing.