[permaculture] Insights into the SSE debate by knowledgeableinsiders.

Kathleen O'Brien Blair ktho at comcast.net
Tue Jan 22 02:33:54 EST 2008

Thanks to Michael for the insights. This fills in a lot of blanks, and
at the same time, creates more, IMPO.

I have no patience for people who break their sacramental vows. That
being said, no amount of betrayal warrants taking away 33 years of a
man's work. That being said, no amount of marital angst forgives two
people tearing at each other and using their joint creation to do it,
particularly when so much rides on the success of said creation.

But this is sounding more and more like revenge of the wronged ex wife.
I don't care for it one whit. Of course he was treating like it was his
creation - it *is* his creation - and Kent should have free rein. There
is no respect for Elders anymore.

If his behaviour was taking things out on Diane, then Diane needed to
woodshed him. No woman is married to man for many years without knowing
how to bring him to heel. It didn't require taking SSE away from him. 

It's kind of nebulous "things that endangered the 5013c." What exactly?
And the "board" do not seem to be forthcoming about what that was.

There is really one big no-no when it comes to 501c3 - no excess
enrichment to individuals inside or outside of the organization. Unless
the "board"  pony up with documentation to prove their assertions, they
need to go away. 

They assert that he was doing things seriously wrong - but don't offer
proof. The very fact that they have changed the rules and
disenfranchised all the members points to nefarious intent on the
"board's" part - not Kent's. I've seen it before that a "board' will
decide that it doesn't like someone but doesn't really have anything to
get rid of them with, so they'll assert "good of the organization" as a
catch all. It's not really for the good of the organization - it's for
their own convenience. Or, they get rid of someone who is about to blow
the whistle on them. I wonder if Kent was going to reveal things to the
members the 'board' wants kept from them?

Nah - this is smelling more and more to me like the women have ganged up
on him to punish him, and the men have gone along.

This is petty tribal politics pure and simple. The "board" need to
resign and Kent needs to come back. 

Honestly, if my husband cheated on me I'd be rageful, and hateful and
vengeful and awful to the hilt. But I wouldn't take his soul's work away
from him in revenge. 

<I might, however, shave off his mustache and beard on only one side of
his face while he's asleep, and paint his toenails red. For starters.>


More information about the permaculture mailing list