thanks.
Just in case you wish to follow the outcome of this matter, LINK
http://www.fightbackinsac.com/forums...=2562#post2562
I really hope we aren't punishing members for posting their honest polite opinions here. That would be a bad precident to set. Just some thoughts and opinions on these matters offered to all.
This is confusing to read AG's responses but highly informative to all, I'm sure. I'll leave it at that. It's obvious.
IMHO: As someone who was 'in the know' about the massive abuse of meglomanic leadership and fickle power somewhere else for years, I see the 'pendulum' has now swung the other way.
Leaders set up matters so they can claim 'plausible deniability' on embarrassing matters when asked and all the while leaders still can and have overlooked some harrassment in favor of punishing others for some percieved harrassment. Certain EXEMPT members do dish out the negativity and harrassment onto others, but they cannot accept when the victims defend themselves back on the harrassment instigators. If the victim defends themselves and asks for staff intervention...only the harrassed victims may get punished. The other side is blameless and not held responsible for their malicous actions to start the whole bickering. I have heard of this before somewhere else. It wasn't good. This is disengenuous at least and for the worst, I'll let forum members make the decisions about these actions.
Thanks a ton, and my best to you...
Just in case you wish to follow the outcome of this matter, LINK
http://www.fightbackinsac.com/forums...=2562#post2562
I really hope we aren't punishing members for posting their honest polite opinions here. That would be a bad precident to set. Just some thoughts and opinions on these matters offered to all.
This is confusing to read AG's responses but highly informative to all, I'm sure. I'll leave it at that. It's obvious.
IMHO: As someone who was 'in the know' about the massive abuse of meglomanic leadership and fickle power somewhere else for years, I see the 'pendulum' has now swung the other way.
Leaders set up matters so they can claim 'plausible deniability' on embarrassing matters when asked and all the while leaders still can and have overlooked some harrassment in favor of punishing others for some percieved harrassment. Certain EXEMPT members do dish out the negativity and harrassment onto others, but they cannot accept when the victims defend themselves back on the harrassment instigators. If the victim defends themselves and asks for staff intervention...only the harrassed victims may get punished. The other side is blameless and not held responsible for their malicous actions to start the whole bickering. I have heard of this before somewhere else. It wasn't good. This is disengenuous at least and for the worst, I'll let forum members make the decisions about these actions.
Thanks a ton, and my best to you...
Comment