Larry

I won't lose any sleep over that either..... I fully expect the cheerleading team to stick together & I also fully expect them to continue to be unable to give a single answer to a single question!

And despite the repeated cheerleader charges, insults, innuendo prevarication & bluster, it's those questions that this is really about!

Perhaps the questions should be directed to people able to answer them or is insulting and badgering more fun. This "cheerleading" bit is getting very tiresome. Get involved in solving the problem or let it go!

quote:

Originally posted by LJS:
Perhaps the questions should be directed to people able to answer them or is insulting and badgering more fun. This "cheerleading" bit is getting very tiresome. Get involved in solving the problem or let it go!

Who would those be?

Larry? any help?

If you can give me some names, I will ask the questions. I would prefer to get genuine answers rather than the run around.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by LJS:
Perhaps the questions should be directed to people able to answer them or is insulting and badgering more fun. This "cheerleading" bit is getting very tiresome. Get involved in solving the problem or let it go!

Why?

I don't pretend to know the answers but they do...... if they know the answers then tell us and if they don't then fess up and tell us why they're defending something with blind faith & nothing more.

If you read the definition of cheerleader that I have posted at least twice, you'll see it's a pretty much exact description, I'm using the term correctly and it's NOT intended to be an insult. (The same goes for the term sheeple) So what's the problem with that?

If you don't like the thread or what's said in it, it isn't compulsory that you read it.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Gentlemen:

This is a sensitive subject without a doubt. Let me make a few comments.

Steve, while I have never met you, I like you and i think you have been a real positive for this forum. Having said that , when the subject of SCI comes up, you come across (to me) like a kid on Christmas morning . That may not be how you feel but that is how you come across to me.

Some of the questions posed to the perceived SCI supporters are often valid questions . However posing those questions to random SCI members such as Matt are a total waste of time. They are the wrong person to ask those questions. I would like to know the answers to some of those questions myself . To badger Matt because he doesn't know and doesn't have access to the information accomplishes nothing.

We are not each other's enemy. Why do we act that way sometimes?

To quote Rodney King, " can't we all just get along?"

I sadly fear that it is the highlight of his day. So much easier to be the critic than try to be constructive.

On that latter point, I have checked the SCI by laws and the Arizona non-profit statute. Seems to me that the best way -- perhaps the only way -- forward would be a derivative suit. Under the Arizona statute interestingly that takes the signatures of 50 members. Undoubtedly that is where Rudolph is headed. Unfortunately, he has framed the matter with reference to his specific circumstance which I think is going to make it uncomfortable for folks to sign on to the petition. I think if he is reading/listening he might reframe the petition to focus in a more generic way on issues and concerns without the thread of how he has been harmed. Then I suspect he could attract some signatories. The good news is that he seems to have the desire and money to fund a derivative lawsuit. While I might not personally agree with what he stands for, sometimes in politics and litigation you end up with strange bedfellows and have to simply keep the end game in mind.

The other ways to effect change have largely been gutted in the by laws, for example, the board nominates the board nominees and while members can petition that someone be a director at large, ultimately the board makes the decision on who stands for election to the board. Pretty nice way for those on the board to make sure that the board remains a friendly place. Unlike a for profit entity where shareholders have some rights and ability to effect change, at least under the Arizona non-profit statute members have very little ability to control things except through the derivative suit option.

BB: Go to the SCI web site. All the officers and directors and hometowns are listed there. While you are there browse through the site. It will be interesting I believe.
By the way Dr Rudolph is a Pittsburgh dentist and should be easy to find.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines: sadly fear that it is the highlight of his day. So much easier to be the critic than try to be constructive.

Is now a good time to point out that it's you guys that are dishing out the destructive & childish insults & abuse etc not I.

If you want to make a constructive contribution to the subject in hand, you can do that by answering the questions being asked!

Rather than waste so much time dreaming up all these oh so ridiculous and petty ways to insult me & others, why don't you rabid SCI supporters (if you don't like the term cheerleaders) instead either give us the answers to the questions being asked or if you don't know the answers, why not go to the Chapters you tell us are so open and honest and ask them to answer the questions?

The title of this thread is "Reform SCI Petition - From Dr Larry Rudolph" - It isn't 'criticise other members or hurl childish accusations etc' so why not behave like adults & stick to the subject in hand?

Or is it that someone, somewhere feels there might be something to hide?

It'd be easier to get a look at Obama's real birth certificate than to get a few simple answers about SCI!

Steve: I have just one more question for you. Since you are a non member, why does anyone owe you an answer to anything pertaining to SCI?

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines: sadly fear that it is the highlight of his day. So much easier to be the critic than try to be constructive.

Or is it that someone, somewhere feels there might be something to hide?

Remember when I said that you came off as being gleeful over anything with SCI? Well, here you go.

Not gleeful about SCI at all...... just laughing like hell at the thought that all these personal insults might be because "someone, somewhere feels there might be something to hide?" hence the little laughing chappie at the end of that particular sentence.

Do buck up Larry. I know the Americans like to butcher the English language but it's fairly easy to understand really!

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Gentlemen:

This is a sensitive subject without a doubt. Let me make a few comments.

Steve, while I have never met you, I like you and i think you have been a real positive for this forum. Having said that , when the subject of SCI comes up, you come across (to me) like a kid on Christmas morning . That may not be how you feel but that is how you come across to me.

Some of the questions posed to the perceived SCI supporters are often valid questions . However posing those questions to random SCI members such as Matt are a total waste of time. They are the wrong person to ask those questions. I would like to know the answers to some of those questions myself . To badger Matt because he doesn't know and doesn't have access to the information accomplishes nothing.

We are not each other's enemy. Why do we act that way sometimes?

To quote Rodney King, " can't we all just get along?"

I sadly fear that it is the highlight of his day. So much easier to be the critic than try to be constructive.

On that latter point, I have checked the SCI by laws and the Arizona non-profit statute. Seems to me that the best way -- perhaps the only way -- forward would be a derivative suit. Under the Arizona statute interestingly that takes the signatures of 50 members. Undoubtedly that is where Rudolph is headed. Unfortunately, he has framed the matter with reference to his specific circumstance which I think is going to make it uncomfortable for folks to sign on to the petition. I think if he is reading/listening he might reframe the petition to focus in a more generic way on issues and concerns without the thread of how he has been harmed. Then I suspect he could attract some signatories. The good news is that he seems to have the desire and money to fund a derivative lawsuit. While I might not personally agree with what he stands for, sometimes in politics and litigation you end up with strange bedfellows and have to simply keep the end game in mind.

The other ways to effect change have largely been gutted in the by laws, for example, the board nominates the board nominees and while members can petition that someone be a director at large, ultimately the board makes the decision on who stands for election to the board. Pretty nice way for those on the board to make sure that the board remains a friendly place. Unlike a for profit entity where shareholders have some rights and ability to effect change, at least under the Arizona non-profit statute members have very little ability to control things except through the derivative suit option.

Mike……. you have it exactly right, which is why I said previously something to the effect that they have things set up so that it is very difficult to make any changes at the top. Regular members have absolutely no say whatsoever in anything and it is impossible to initiate any change unless you can work your way into the executive. Even being on the board means nothing if you are not part of the current clique in charge.

Furthermore, directors/board members that are not US members are also kept at arms length and they go out of their way to make sure that international members have no say in anything……. token players to make it look good.

It is very much the 'old boys club' at the top.

quote:

Originally posted by LJS:
Steve: I have just one more question for you. Since you are a non member, why does anyone owe you an answer to anything pertaining to SCI?

It's not about me being a current member or not, it's about my freedom to ask whatever questions I choose whenever I choose to ask them, wherever I choose to ask them & on any subject I choose.

I'm not a member of the US Democratic Party or the UK Labour Party either but I'm still entitled to criticise them & ask questions about their policies whether they or anyone else likes or not.

I think you'll find the US Constitution itself contains something about freedom of expression and beliefs.

Hope that answers your question.

quote:

Originally posted by LJS:
Steve: I have just one more question for you. Since you are a non member, why does anyone owe you an answer to anything pertaining to SCI?

I am glad you brought this up as I meant to earlier. In reality, no one on the executive of any organization is going to feel compelled to lay out the details of what they do and the decisions they make to non-members.

I know I have been on the executive of several organizations in the past and that has been the general consensus of every one of them. They would respond to general enquiries, but the details of operation are none of the business of non-members.

quote:

Originally posted by Skyline:

I am glad you brought this up as I meant to earlier. In reality, no one on the executive of any organization is going to feel compelled to lay out the details of what they do and the decisions they make to non-members.

I know I have been on the executive of several organizations in the past and that has been the general consensus of every one of them. They would respond to general enquiries, but the details of operation are none of the business of non-members.

There are plenty of organisations that do that very thing and in fact, I've posted a link (several times) on this very thread of a charitable organisation that has spent something in the region of UKP100M over the last 30 odd years and every penny they've donated over all that time is listed. It shows how much, to whom and when.

I could be wrong but am fairly sure that all UK charities have to do that by law and wouldn't be surprised if it were the same in the US and I think you'll find that SCI is a registered charity and holds tax exempt status.

If nothing else, why apparently hide the information if there is nothing to hide?

As much as I hate to say it this thread has been a complete waste of time.

SCI is SCI. It is what it is.

If SCI were different, there would be no DSC.

I quit SCI over their refusal to deal with Usangu Safaris.

I rejoined so I can go to the conventions.

After this exchange, I have no further expectations that would truly benefit hunters.

Altruism is dead.

The deck is stacked to maintain the status quo.

I will expend my efforts where they have meaning.

Jeff

I would like to know how many people signed.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:

I quit SCI over their refusal to deal with Usangu Safaris.

Did you have some problem yourself with Usanga?

A lot of people has problems with Usangu. Zahir was deported from the US. He took a lot of peoples money and never took them on safari or they never got their trophies.

The Hunting Report set up a special report on Usangu.

Yes, Jeff was a victim.

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
What's it to be, Laurel and Hardy or the 3 Musketeers ?

Or perhaps?

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
A lot of people has problems with Usangu. Zahir was deported from the US. He took a lot of peoples money and never took them on safari or they never got their trophies.

The Hunting Report set up a special report on Usangu.

Yes, Jeff was a victim.

Yeah I know about Usanga, I was just wondering. I'm sorry to hear that Jeff was involved. I can understand why he might be pissed at SCI because of that.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
I would like to know how many people signed.

As would I Larry. I sent him a message and asked him straight out. He has never responded. That in itself raises more questions, does it not?

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
A lot of people has problems with Usangu. Zahir was deported from the US. He took a lot of peoples money and never took them on safari or they never got their trophies.

The Hunting Report set up a special report on Usangu.

Yes, Jeff was a victim.

Yeah I know about Usanga, I was just wondering. I'm sorry to hear that Jeff was involved. I can understand why he might be pissed at SCI because of that.

There is another thread here in which Zahir attempted to promote himself and his new company. A lot of the details of Jeff's problems are there.

quote:

Originally posted by Skyline:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by larryshores:
I would like to know how many people signed.

As would I Larry. I sent him a message and asked him straight out. He has never responded. That in itself raises more questions, does it not?[/QUOTE

I think it raises more than one question in my mind.

I'll say one thing about this thread that is a fact!! There sure are a lot of folks named Larry involved. Hard to keep them all straight some times.

Larry Sellers
SCI(International)Life Member
Sabatti 'trash' Shooter
R 8 Blaser
DRSS

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by Skyline:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by larryshores:
I would like to know how many people signed.

As would I Larry. I sent him a message and asked him straight out. He has never responded. That in itself raises more questions, does it not?[/QUOTE

I think it raises more than one question in my mind.

You can be non profit and not be a charity. I'm sure the vast majority of non profit corporations are not charities. My 18 house homeowners association is non profit and not a charity.

quote:

The other ways to effect change have largely been gutted in the by laws

Just like the politicians.

They made sure whatever the voters say, nothing is going to affect the over all running - MISRUNNING - of the country.

Here is where I have been saying all along.

we need DRASTIC change in SCI to be able to turn it to what it was originally MEANT o be.

I agree with you Saeed.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

The other ways to effect change have largely been gutted in the by laws

Just like the politicians.

They made sure whatever the voters say, nothing is going to affect the over all running - MISRUNNING - of the country.

Here is where I have been saying all along.

we need DRASTIC change in SCI to be able to turn it to what it was originally MEANT o be.

Completely agree.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

The other ways to effect change have largely been gutted in the by laws

Here is where I have been saying all along.

we need DRASTIC change in SCI to be able to turn it to what it was originally MEANT o be.

So long as someone else does it, not you?

Saeed, would you mind saying why Dr. Rudolph felt the need to email you and have you post this on AR instead of coming on himself and posting it, then standing up to whatever the folks here had to say?

I didn't sign the petition because its all about him.

I think if someone came around with a petition to look in to the management of SCI without a millstone of "its all me" I would feel differently about it.

AR is not the only website this was posted on. I have seen it elsewhere .

quote:

It is very much the 'old boys club' at the top.

Or the "SCI Mafia Dons"

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Gentlemen:

This is a sensitive subject without a doubt. Let me make a few comments.

Steve, while I have never met you, I like you and i think you have been a real positive for this forum. Having said that , when the subject of SCI comes up, you come across (to me) like a kid on Christmas morning . That may not be how you feel but that is how you come across to me.

Some of the questions posed to the perceived SCI supporters are often valid questions . However posing those questions to random SCI members such as Matt are a total waste of time. They are the wrong person to ask those questions. I would like to know the answers to some of those questions myself . To badger Matt because he doesn't know and doesn't have access to the information accomplishes nothing.

We are not each other's enemy. Why do we act that way sometimes?

To quote Rodney King, " can't we all just get along?"

Good post Mr Shores.

I am not a member of SCI, I have no idea if they have chapters in Scotland or the UK (until Steve said so)
Steve, exactly how long were you a member, and when and what chapter, in order to formulate your poor opinion of SCI?
Are you a member of any other pro hunting group that you could point to, that does it differently to SCI.(leaving AR aside for the moment )
There seems to be, in my humble opinion, a lot of folk, on our side of the hunting and shooting industry that are members, to be all either, wrong or don't care.
Mat, Mike, Larry and others seem to work away the best they can,in their busy lives for SCI, well done you. jc

Appreciate your sentiments JC.

If you would like to contact the London Chapter (the only one in the UK) - the contact email is <president@scilondon.org> I believe they have a couple events each year but they dont seem to have a dedicated website.

Thank you Matt, I'll do that.jc

John

I was a member of SCI for (probably) somewhere between 3 - 5 years or so (can't remember off hand) but I was there long enough to find the people in the Chapter weren't really my cup of tea or even particularly interested in what I was & long enough to become an SCI measurer.

That said, it wasn't particularly that alone that formed my bad opinion of them........ rather, it was my years in the industry where I could see a lot of mutual back slapping going on & no end of money going into the so called donation scheme and not much appearing to come out of it again.

As I've said before, I don't want to see SCI closed down but would like to see them improved. Just think how much they could achieve if they put all that money to good use.

As for the rest, I was a member of PHASA for probably something like 20 years (and would still be a member if they had a retired list but they don't and I'm not willing to pay full subscription for so little in return), KZN hunters for several years (can't remember how long) and several such as BFSS & BASC for a number of years. (I've even got a WAGBI sticker somewhere so must have been a member of that before they merged to become BASC)

But none of that matters at all and in fact, as far as I'm concerned it's not really much of anyone's business.

What matters, is the title of the thread and so far, we've had no replies to the questions raised.

I personally think Saeed has it dead right when he says:

"Just like the politicians.

They made sure whatever the voters say, nothing is going to affect the over all running - MISRUNNING - of the country.

Here is where I have been saying all along.

we need DRASTIC change in SCI to be able to turn it to what it was originally MEANT to be"

Larry (Shores) says: "To quote Rodney King, " can't we all just get along?""

I agree with that but it's not me that's behaved like a spoilt child & thrown personal insults & abuse at every opportunity and it's not me that's put people on jgnore etc....

I'm more than happy to take part if friendly, reasoned debate without heat (and that's what I always try to do) but I'm not going to change my opinions without good reason and if that put's people's noses out of joint then that's their problem and not mine.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Saeed, would you mind saying why Dr. Rudolph felt the need to email you and have you post this on AR instead of coming on himself and posting it, then standing up to whatever the folks here had to say?

I didn't sign the petition because its all about him.

I think if someone came around with a petition to look in to the management of SCI without a millstone of "its all me" I would feel differently about it.

Frankly, I think he did not have the balls to post it himself, as AR members would have made his presence here very miserable.

Him being a past SCI president is enough to tell us that he was part of the problem we are all trying to get rid off.

Thanks for that Steve.
WAGBI!!! Now we are giving our ages away.
In my case(also a member of BASC)looking back through rose coloured spectacles!
Did I just throw a stone .
If you are still a member you have retained a wee link with the rotten old UK .jc

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Saeed, would you mind saying why Dr. Rudolph felt the need to email you and have you post this on AR instead of coming on himself and posting it, then standing up to whatever the folks here had to say?

I didn't sign the petition because its all about him.

I think if someone came around with a petition to look in to the management of SCI without a millstone of "its all me" I would feel differently about it.

Frankly, I think he did not have the balls to post it himself, as AR members would have made his presence here very miserable.

Him being a past SCI president is enough to tell us that he was part of the problem we are all trying to get rid off.

Then why is this a sticky thread?

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Saeed, would you mind saying why Dr. Rudolph felt the need to email you and have you post this on AR instead of coming on himself and posting it, then standing up to whatever the folks here had to say?

I didn't sign the petition because its all about him.

I think if someone came around with a petition to look in to the management of SCI without a millstone of "its all me" I would feel differently about it.

Frankly, I think he did not have the balls to post it himself, as AR members would have made his presence here very miserable.

Him being a past SCI president is enough to tell us that he was part of the problem we are all trying to get rid off.

Then why is this a sticky thread?

Matt,

May be you are happy with the status quo of SCI.

Many of us are not and we really like to see something being done.