First off a hearty congratulations on election 2008.
While there is much to condemn in our one party
system, generally positive things happened.
Second, I want to lay out a context to assist you.
To say I was flabbergasted when in a list of
refund requests I saw the names Dan and Joshua
could be an understatement.
What it suggested to me was a state change I
feel an imperative to help you resist.
Third, I want to spend just a small amount of time
reconstructing the timeline and offering some
suggestion on how to best get things done.
Shall we begin?
I have nothing more to say about the elections
as they don’t even go into effect until Jan 20 J
Though I will say it’s telling that something which
took nearly 2 year and more money than any
similar task will take another 70 days to get off
the ground…and then…we’re being told by the
one we chose that …
…even though the revolution of HOPE and of
CHANGE has come, for the next four years
….nothing may get better.
It’s an apt metaphor to remember that some-
times things get so messed up that no amount
of intentions, campaigning or hope / dream
will change the conditions in the short term.
Second, I want to remind you of something
which happened to and among other of our
friends…
You were hired as a consultant for that online
radio program with the help of Bill Hibbler.
The agreement was structured with payments
After the first payment, the party said your
services were no longer needed and a request
was made for a refund.
You expressed that from your perspective,
and all the more because you passed on other
opportunities (ie had a real cost / damage)
that not only was nothing to be returned, but
more…the remainder was still due.
While those who owed you didn’t see it this
way, you did that great demonstration at the
“UnSeminar” where more or less the whole
objective room agreed with you. That is,
they agreed that you still owed all to the
person you hired to listen to you even though
you “released” them of continued services.
It is this context on which to reset in experiencing
our state on this project.
And while I agree there are some added or
useful considerations because there are
multiple independent parties who are set back
by the actions of other parties, …
…there is at this point not ONE person who
has done as agreed.
In fact, there was ONE, and she’s been fully
relieved and is financially whole.
When I saw you add in the names of Joshua
and Dan, I knew something happened and
I can only speculate. But all in all, what happened
was you were harmed by other’s and I suspect
For diverse reasons “turned”
NOW, there are some other people who are
in at least various levels of “wrong”
And before talking about others, let me talk
about us internally.
And this brings us to “the third” talking point.
Ben, I have suffered from a kind of ambivalent
rigidity. Let me give you a specific:
I’ve noticed in say 3 or more occasions you’ve
mentioned not “seeing” the accounting…
…in my sense more recent examples of this
seem to have almost descended into a kind of
Accusation attached to the fact.
What’s weird is interpretation. I thought
you were mentioning this fact as if to say it
is part of an admission…
…I can’t know all our options as I’m not in that
part.
You see, Ben, I told Donna several times that
you didn’t want to be a part of that. She had
suggested bringing you into conversations and
I dissuaded her…
…my thoughts, which may or may not have been
right, was if you had changed your desires and
wanted to be in the accounting/finance side
you would have asked.
I now think you may have been “asking” in a
passive way. In the spirit of disclosure, I now
consider you may have been asking more
recently in a passive-aggressive way.
In fact, Donna and I were going to present
to you the accounting at our Chicago/Singapore
meetings…
…but as you know there were challenges
there…
Now, however, even if you have not changed
your position and you still want to be out of
the accounting area, I request you join it in
at a cursory level for three reasons:
1) It’s harming you: For example, Big Mike,
who is one of those interesting cases…
...never paid as agreed, and when he
finally paid something (very late) he paid
not the $7,500 he charged you…rather
$5,000 (and this can be determined by
connecting to the accounting in even a
small way) – Something we should do
together (or at least have done on your
behalf) before you accept less than you
should (should it be that way).
Another example, would be Josh and
Dan – who these two who really became
my main “sticking points” on your behalf
to see them listed as people you want to
relieve showed me just how much you’re
being bullied.
2) It’s harming us all: People are using
the division of knowledge to divide US.
3) We need a unified and realistic solution.
And that solution affords us less division
not only of the basic accounting but also
the basic production and distribution, as
well as, the basic messaging to anyone
else who has a legitimate request to
knowing what we’re doing (ie, Frank B).
Now, with regard to the next steps. I would like
you to embrace stepping up and taking a full role.
Resist stipulation.
And let’s do it as soon as Donna returns from
London after Sing and Malasia.
And then let’s get back to getting the word out
to everyone on their status and our direction.
Bye for now,
Paulie Sabol
PS On a personal note. This will be turned
into a win.
