For now we see through a glass darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. (Corinthians 13:12)
A whole day of discussion has ensued following the Board's report and I am, frankly, more concerned than angry.
The facts of whether or not I unbanned anyone were easy to check. There is NO reason why the Board could not have done this. It begs the question as to why they did not. Was there not a single Board member interested enough to verify the simple facts? Was there not a single Board member who thought it might be a good idea to check with me before publishing that report?
I have prepared a time line. Indulge me readers, to see what I mean.
Posts 891 to 921 are relevant to this blog. Post #891
The date is 07-19-2010 at 2.59AM.
UKSusanfanAnn posted that 'LEM' was on the page. She was referring to Lovin' Every Minute. Strange that she knew her by the diminutive her friends call her...the cyber-troll would have known that of course.
One minute later at 3.00AM
Hulapig announced that 'banned and resigned members' were being let back in.
A member asked if anyone had seen LEM before as she did not recognise her.
Hulapig replied that she was a banned member and that (YOUR) staff was not doing it.
at 3.09AM I welcomed LEM back. I was delighted to see her.
at 3.12AM WAMcKinley posted that according to her memory LEM was an ex-moderator who had resigned and had been banned for no discernible reason. She posted that she wondered if LEM had been awarded amnesty (which is her opinion would have been richly deserved). This was the first mention of amnesty.
at 3.12AM (contemporaneously with WAM) but in response to Hulapig I said I thought there had been some confusion as LEM has not been banned; she had resigned.
at 3.15AM - just 16 mins. after LEM had been spotted on the page, Hulapig posted (in response to an enquiry to Bubblegum) that he 'might want to ask CL' because she thought I 'had a clue'.
At this point I was not a moderator, yet LEM was on the page. I had been accused of letting banned members in. The other two former members were mentioned by UKSusanfanAnn as being on the page at 3.41am. I was still not a Moderator.
11.15PM -: Some 20 hours after Hulapig had hinted heavily that I 'might have a clue' what was going on, I volunteered to become a temporary Mod/admin in response to a request for help by lchris which was posted on the forum. I did so after WAMcKinley, whose name I had put forward at 6.29pm, declined. Call For Staff Volunteers
I can but wonder why were they content to let me become the fall guy for that incident? And now that it has been shown that I did NOT do it, is anyone interested in finding out who did?
Why was the email from Lonnirose overlooked/ignored by the Board when it clearly proved that the staff had been told of a plan and had formed a plan of their own to counteract it? That would be understandable.
Why was the email from Danileo and JudyOkla, stating their intention to open a new website and circulated to some members not taken into consideration?
I know there are good people on the Board. Will not one of them at least stand up and demand that the report be re-written with some degree of accuracy?
