Peter Gariepy

Should a new thread be opened for discussion of BCA BOD Nominees?

Should a new thread be opened for discussion of BCA BOD Nominees?   

36 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Should a new thread be opened for discussion of BCA BOD Nominees? (NOTE: It will be heavily moderators to adhere to forum rules, ie civil, constructive and NO personal attacks.


  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 04/02/2019 at 03:38 AM

Recommended Posts

I don't really know if I want to wade in here, but I did receive an E-mail recently where apparently one BCA member/board member/board candidate suggested that there were three candidates who were trying to "hijack" the board. I will admit that I have not paid much attention to the situation, which is perhaps a mistake on my part, but when it gets down to it, few of us join clubs for the political aspects. I am grateful for those who choose to serve and I understand the difficulties of trying to make all the people happy all the time (I have served on the local CCCA board for several years and was the director for a while as well--not the same as national, but not all that different, either).

 

Anyway, that E-mail got me thinking and paying attention. I received my recent Bugle and read each candidate's bio carefully, and since I didn't know who the "hijackers" were or even who sent me that E-mail, which I deleted, I didn't see any obvious agendas. Clearly there's something else going on.

 

With that in mind, can anyone summarize--perhaps without using names--what, exactly is going on? Can both sides be explained in a cool, calm way so that someone like me (and I presume a great majority of the BCA membership) can sort of understand what's going on?

 

That said, I see more people than I can vote for on the list of candidates who are friends, both those I know in person and through this message board, and they are all people I admire, respect, and trust. Just the same, for those people who are not personally acquainted with candidates, and maybe to help all of us better see what's going on that's causing so much friction, can someone present a succinct, careful, non-accusatory summary of the situation?

 

If not, I get it and I understand. But if it's important enough to make people resign and send secret message and delete threads and make angry comments, it's probably worth discussing like adults.

 

Thanks!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, John said:

Not allowing the discussion is censorship, and I'm disappointed the issue is being put up for a vote.   Those of you who don't want to contribute to or follow the discussion have the option to ignore it---why isn't that good enough?   

 

IMO the rules of the forum should be enforced consistently.  I see no need to single out this topic for censorship and heavy-handed moderating as long as opinions are being stated in a civil manner.

 

 

Yeah, so if I want a heavily UNMODERATED discussion, which do I choose?  I guess NO, because I’m inclined to think a heavily censored forum is worse than no form at all. 

 

IMO, Chuck’s posts were civil, constructive and contained NO personal attacks yet they were taken down. The only response was a list of 6,000 rules, and we were left to guess which rule was broken. 

 

If ANY post falls outside of the rules, TELL THE OP AND THE FORUM WHICH SPECIFIC RULE WAS BROKEN, and give the OP a chance to fix it. 

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes you have to be careful what you ask for. I personally think that transparency is the best policy in an organization although that might make it more work for the volunteer moderating staff here on the forum. I have to agree with both Ronnie's suggestion and MrEarl's suggestion. Both are two different versions that would allow a bit of transparency in a topic that is obviously of great interest based on the large number of emails that I have recently received on the subject. Ronnie's suggestion would probably take less time from the moderators, but either of them would be better than trying to prevent discussion of the topic. The good news is that the timeline for the entire discussion will be self limiting. It will soon be of no use as the ballots will have all be returned in the near future and we will then know who the members have chosen to lead the club into the future.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's assume there's a contentious issue, and that two members take different sides on that issue and enter into a debate on the hypothetical thread.  Let's assume further that the folks who read this debate are persuaded to agree with one or the other.  Then what?  Without knowing where the candidates fall on the issue, how would you know how to vote?  If the candidates don't answer the question, how do you identify the candidate(s) with whom you agree?

 

Point being, while it's fine for the members to debate the issues, it's crucial for the candidates to participate.  If they don't respond to membership concerns now, why would you think they'd be responsive if elected?  If they don't feel they need to work to earn your vote, why should a voter have any confidence that they will work after they've received it?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

I don't really know if I want to wade in here, but I did receive an E-mail recently where apparently one BCA member/board member/board candidate suggested that there were three candidates who were trying to "hijack" the board. I will admit that I have not paid much attention to the situation, which is perhaps a mistake on my part, but when it gets down to it, few of us join clubs for the political aspects. I am grateful for those who choose to serve and I understand the difficulties of trying to make all the people happy all the time (I have served on the local CCCA board for several years and was the director for a while as well--not the same as national, but not all that different, either).

 

Anyway, that E-mail got me thinking and paying attention. I received my recent Bugle and read each candidate's bio carefully, and since I didn't know who the "hijackers" were or even who sent me that E-mail, which I deleted, I didn't see any obvious agendas. Clearly there's something else going on.

 

With that in mind, can anyone summarize--perhaps without using names--what, exactly is going on? Can both sides be explained in a cool, calm way so that someone like me (and I presume a great majority of the BCA membership) can sort of understand what's going on?

 

That said, I see more people than I can vote for on the list of candidates who are friends, both those I know in person and through this message board, and they are all people I admire, respect, and trust. Just the same, for those people who are not personally acquainted with candidates, and maybe to help all of us better see what's going on that's causing so much friction, can someone present a succinct, careful, non-accusatory summary of the situation?

 

If not, I get it and I understand. But if it's important enough to make people resign and send secret message and delete threads and make angry comments, it's probably worth discussing like adults.

 

Thanks!

PM sent.  Not going to put it on here.  Jack Welch may want to send you the opposing viewpoint. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KongaMan-

 

Alan Oldfield (President), Mike Book, and Bill Stoneberg are all members of this forum.  I don't know about Sidney Meyer.  I don't recall seeing Mr. Eichelberger on here nor Gordon.    One of our group Joe Suarez I do not believe is active on the forums.  I am always happy to answer questions and one of my respondents by email came with a membership number in the 500's and he countered everything I stated and I loved it!  I'm not always right for sure.  It was civil and I learned a lot.

 

But I don't think it's a good use of the forum.  Just read our profiles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"With that in mind, can anyone summarize--perhaps without using names--what, exactly is going on? Can both sides be explained in a cool, calm way so that someone like me (and I presume a great majority of the BCA membership) can sort of understand what's going on?"

 

Since I am a writer, I will try to summarize:

I think the bad feelings began when the Driven Class (not judged to high standards, but a little more than just "display-only) cars were relegated to a remote parking lot that was walled off from the rest of the meet by a high fence at the South Bend, IN. national meet. This led to a feeling among Driven Class and non-judged car owners that they were being treated as unwanted step-children compared to the cars being judged in the 400-point classes. The awards banquet at the end of each national meet tends to reinforce that perception, with most of its emphasis being on trophies and awards. Pre-War cars, being harder to get parts for and tougher to keep in an original state--especially if you want to drive them on today's roads--tend to congregate in the Driven Class, the Modified Class, or the Display-only class, unless the owner is well-heeled enough to do a total restoration and bring the car to the meet in an enclosed trailer. There are exceptions, but that's the norm.

 

The bad feelings got worse when in subsequent national meets the Pre-War (and other) cars were separated from each other depending on what they had signed up for (400-point; Archival; Display-only;  Modified, or Driven Class), and at some meets there were assigned parking spaces for the entire meet, based on what type of judging or non-judging the car's owner had signed up for.

 

In the meantime, people got elected to the BCA Board who were and are quite stratified in the types of Buicks they focus on. We have some Board members who are only interested in Pre-WWII cars, and have little knowledge or interest in newer Buicks. Likewise, we have some Board members who are only interested in the later model Buicks and have little knowledge or interest in the older ones. This deepens the divide.

 

Add to that, a lack of financial reporting to the membership of the club for nearly three years, following the sudden death of our long-time club accountant, Joel Gauthier, and suspicions tend to build up about what is going on with the club's finances. This has recently been rectified, with the publication a few months ago of an annual financial report in the magazine, but it took nearly three years to do so and a lot of reputational damage was done in the meantime. In addition, an outside auditing firm has recently been hired, after a Board member made an issue out of the lack of audits and adequate financial reports for many years and the club's build-up of a large financial reserve, which, (from my perhaps uninformed point of view), the reasons for and size of the reserve were not adequately communicated to new Board members as they came onboard. When the reserve reached or got close to $700,000, one alarmed Board member reported the club to the IRS, out of fear that it would lose its non-profit status, and when he could not get a majority of the Board to acquiesce to his concerns. He also alleged wrong-doing by some, but that has not been proven and should not be brought up unless or until it is proven, and I doubt that it will be. Carelessness--maybe. Evil or bad intent--I sincerely doubt it.  This has made the divisions and bad feelings even worse.

 

At about the same time, the BCA Board majority removed the Director of the BCA's Pre-War Division due to concerns that the division's membership records were not being tracked and newsletters were not being distributed with regularity. The majority of the  Board then took the step of appointing another Pre-War Division Director, and this person at about the same time attacked the Board member who reported the club to the IRS, with a petition for his removal from the club. At the same time, the Pre-War Division held their own election and elected another member as their Director. So, now you had two competing directors for the same Division--one with a lot of "baggage" due to his very public attack on the Board member at a national meet and not having been elected by anybody other than the Board majority, and the other duly elected but by a somewhat questionable list of Pre-War Division members.

 

This brings us down to the current BCA Board election situation, in which there is a definite "us versus them"  group, as well as a couple of unaffiliated or perhaps uninformed Board candidates in the current group of eight candidates. Much like the national Republicans versus Democrats, each camp is making claims about the other that are probably more extreme than reality. For example, the establishment group (for lack of a better term) is not against Pre-War cars or non-judged cars as the challengers might have you believe; and the challengers (for lack of a better term) do not want to eliminate BCA judging (as the establishment group would have you believe), they just feel there is too much emphasis on it. So, that's where we are, and I will probably be attacked by one group or the other for what I have written above--so be it. I'm a 40-year BCA member who has had a lot of involvement with the club and that's my perspective, as fairly as I can write it.

Pete Phillips, BCA #7338

  • Like 18
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said, Pete.  I wish we could get your comments out to all members, not just those on the forum. So, I am challenging all members on the forum to get Pete's most logical explanation out to those that have not  yet voted.  I will probably write more on this, but this is Saturday evening.  Also, I hate to see various "groups" trying to sway votes by mailings only to certain members based on "suggestions as what will happen if they vote for certain people".  (We made to have our own Mueller investigation on illegal ballot influencing.) 

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Pete, and others who took the time to send me a PM. I understand the situation much better and hope that the path forward is productive for the club. We're all here for the same reasons and everyone serving on the board is a volunteer, so hopefully it will be a fresh start. It sounds like the right things have been done to rectify the biggest complaints. Thank you for all the feedback and remember that we're all friends here with a common love for all things Buick.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40 year member?  Were you still in diapers?:D

 

   Thanks for that explanation, my friend.  Perceptions can be terrible. Or not. Depending upon how things are perceived! 

 

  See everybody in OKC!

 

  Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm member #55, second member outside the state of California, and I've been an active member of AACA since 1962.  These things come and go in all the car clubs from time to time.  In the end, one side or the other's position will win out and, unlike the current USA government, the majority will move on.  I have my own personal likes and dislikes regarding the cars I like.  I noticed that I know one member, have met one other and have a longtime recollection of another.  But, I didn't vote based on those associations, except for two.  I got an opinion from somebody who is impeccable and close to the action than I am.  And I used what he told me 2 out of 3 times.  The "check" is in the mail.  In the end, after all, we're all like fleas on a dogs back.....................we go where the dog goes.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Pete. Well stated. 

 

Additional points on the PWD if I may. 

 

The PWD Interim Director appointed by the BOD, who did the attacking, was subsequently removed from his PWD position by the BOD.  I believe the BOD Minutes recording this action have yet to be posted. 

 

The PWD member who was elected PWD Director, chose to relinquish his position to make the PWD election a moot point, end any discussion on the election, who voted or who did not vote and revert the PWD Directorship back to Mr Shaw.  

 

The PWD has been working with the PWD Membership and the new BCA Office to improve the PWD membership roster.  Note this effort is not the Bugle PWD 2.0 article as that effort did not generate any shared information once that individual was removed by the BOD. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Pete Phillips said:

"With that in mind, can anyone summarize--perhaps without using names--what, exactly is going on? Can both sides be explained in a cool, calm way so that someone like me (and I presume a great majority of the BCA membership) can sort of understand what's going on?"

 

Since I am a writer, I will try to summarize:

I think the bad feelings began when the Driven Class (not judged to high standards, but a little more than just "display-only) cars were relegated to a remote parking lot that was walled off from the rest of the meet by a high fence at the South Bend, IN. national meet. This led to a feeling among Driven Class and non-judged car owners that they were being treated as unwanted step-children compared to the cars being judged in the 400-point classes. The awards banquet at the end of each national meet tends to reinforce that perception, with most of its emphasis being on trophies and awards. Pre-War cars, being harder to get parts for and tougher to keep in an original state--especially if you want to drive them on today's roads--tend to congregate in the Driven Class, the Modified Class, or the Display-only class, unless the owner is well-heeled enough to do a total restoration and bring the car to the meet in an enclosed trailer. There are exceptions, but that's the norm.

 

 

The bad feelings got worse when in subsequent national meets the Pre-War (and other) cars were separated from each other depending on what they had signed up for (400-point; Archival; Display-only;  Modified, or Driven Class), and at some meets there were assigned parking spaces for the entire meet, based on what type of judging or non-judging the car's owner had signed up for.

 

 

In the meantime, people got elected to the BCA Board who were and are quite stratified in the types of Buicks they focus on. We have some Board members who are only interested in Pre-WWII cars, and have little knowledge or interest in newer Buicks. Likewise, we have some Board members who are only interested in the later model Buicks and have little knowledge or interest in the older ones. This deepens the divide.

 

 

Add to that, a lack of financial reporting to the membership of the club for nearly three years, following the sudden death of our long-time club accountant, Joel Gauthier, and suspicions tend to build up about what is going on with the club's finances. This has recently been rectified, with the publication a few months ago of an annual financial report in the magazine, but it took nearly three years to do so and a lot of reputational damage was done in the meantime. In addition, an outside auditing firm has recently been hired, after a Board member made an issue out of the lack of audits and adequate financial reports for many years and the club's build-up of a large financial reserve, which, (from my perhaps uninformed point of view), the reasons for and size of the reserve were not adequately communicated to new Board members as they came onboard. When the reserve reached or got close to $700,000, one alarmed Board member reported the club to the IRS, out of fear that it would lose its non-profit status, and when he could not get a majority of the Board to acquiesce to his concerns. He also alleged wrong-doing by some, but that has not been proven and should not be brought up unless or until it is proven, and I doubt that it will be. Carelessness--maybe. Evil or bad intent--I sincerely doubt it.  This has made the divisions and bad feelings even worse.

 

 

At about the same time, the BCA Board majority removed the Director of the BCA's Pre-War Division due to concerns that the division's membership records were not being tracked and newsletters were not being distributed with regularity. The majority of the  Board then took the step of appointing another Pre-War Division Director, and this person at about the same time attacked the Board member who reported the club to the IRS, with a petition for his removal from the club. At the same time, the Pre-War Division held their own election and elected another member as their Director. So, now you had two competing directors for the same Division--one with a lot of "baggage" due to his very public attack on the Board member at a national meet and not having been elected by anybody other than the Board majority, and the other duly elected but by a somewhat questionable list of Pre-War Division members.

 

 

This brings us down to the current BCA Board election situation, in which there is a definite "us versus them"  group, as well as a couple of unaffiliated or perhaps uninformed Board candidates in the current group of eight candidates. Much like the national Republicans versus Democrats, each camp is making claims about the other that are probably more extreme than reality. For example, the establishment group (for lack of a better term) is not against Pre-War cars or non-judged cars as the challengers might have you believe; and the challengers (for lack of a better term) do not want to eliminate BCA judging (as the establishment group would have you believe), they just feel there is too much emphasis on it. So, that's where we are, and I will probably be attacked by one group or the other for what I have written above--so be it. I'm a 40-year BCA member who has had a lot of involvement with the club and that's my perspective, as fairly as I can write it.

Pete Phillips, BCA #7338

 

Thanks Pete.

 

It is just a shame you were not able to actually publish this or something similar in the April Bugle for all BCA members to see. It would have been a much more accurate reflection on the situation than what was actually published about the election in that issue.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Pete Phillips said:

". When the reserve reached or got close to $700,000, one alarmed Board member reported the club to the IRS, out of fear that it would lose its non-profit status, and when he could not get a majority of the Board to acquiesce to his concerns. 

Pete Phillips, BCA #7338

 

The reserves never reached  $700,000.  It has been in the $ 500,000 range for the past few years.   The incoming BOD members and all the BOD members get a financial sheet as soon as I get it from the accountant from the prior month.

 

$ 500,000 reserves would  pay bills for a year and a half if we got no reserves and no renewals.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted yes, as a former member who believes in open, honest and respectful dialog. I choose not to renew my membership when I recieved an all-caps DM from a Board member lecturing me about how to interact on the forum. This is a hobby, not national politics. The lack of civility among some in the club truely astounds me. I hope you can get your house in order.

Edited by Buick64C (see edit history)
  • Like 4
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read the bios provided by Mr. Gariepy.  I don’t expect to see my hard copy of the Bugle for about 3 weeks yet.  I’d prefer it if we could have a civil discourse about the BOD election, but I fear that we wouldn’t be able to act adult enough to have it.  I’ve been around long enough to have met many of the BOD candidates.  One question doesn’t seem to be asked in general is with departing members of the BOD, what skills will remain on the board and what will the board require?  Emphasis on that may help us to move from a popularity contest to actually creating a more functional, cooperative board.

 

Overall, I have to express my disappointment at the bickering occurring in recent history.  How do we go from “I choose not to have my Buicks judged and don’t participate in judging” to being accused of wanting to dismantle judging if elected?  How do we have a system that was so reliant on one individual that his passing caused so much turmoil?  I believe having better systems and procedures and backup plans is a better way to go.  

 

I’ve received emails from both camps.  They certainly tempt me to vote for the two individuals who are in neither camp.

 

I’ve been a member about 16 years, joining in time to participate in the 2003 event in Flint.  I’ve since attended many National Meets, joined a couple Divisions (and didn’t renew in one of them), have hosted a couple tours that some Gopher State Chapter and local BCA members participated in, and have been a Gopher State Chapter member since late 2005 / early 2006 - I initially joined to offer volunteer assistance for he 2006 meet.

 

As I joined after the 400 point system was implemented, I can’t comment what the meets were like before then.  I do wonder how things have changed.  I also wonder what the banquet at the National was like before 400 point judging (I am assuming there was one).  From personal observation and opinion, I do think there is perhaps too much emphasis on 400 point judging overall.  My 23 year old daughter and I (and perhaps my 21 year old son...I forget) have attained the points to be recognized as Senior Judges in the BCA and have had some of our cars judged in the 400 point system and have had both disappointments and pleasant surprises with the 400 point system.  I love that there is recognition for archival cars that haven’t been restored and recognition for members who have driven their Buicks to the event.  I would never advocate eliminating the 400 point judging, but I think some tweaks and changes are in order to improve the system and reduce the stressors involved.

 

I enjoy the BCA and the Bugle.  I’ve made great friends that I never would have met but for attending National meets and this forum.  I am grateful for them.  I’m also grateful for the overall quality of the Bugle and would prefer it not be forced to receive cuts, even though I’m not “into” the Buicks featured in every issue nor in love with every article.  I do read every issue from cover to cover.  This is a hobby and I think we’d all be wise to remember that.  My children have been raised as part of the BCA - they were 3, 5, and 7 at our first event in 2003.  I’ve witnessed the decline of the youth programs at the National meet, but appreciate that there also seemed to be a demographic shift in attendees and in recent years I’d say we have an increase in family / youth attendees, so it would be ideal if we could institute those programs again.

 

I’ve been asked a number of times to let my name stand for the board elections and I do see that happening in the future.  At the present I have personal / business reasons for not doing so.

 

Sorry for the ramble.  I wish this overall situation was less contentious.

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ted sweet said:

i get the e bugle and never received a ballot

it's in the mail please rest

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me say ABSOLUTELY that there has never been said that judging would be eliminated by Shaw, Moran, or Suarez, and also myself.  The discussion has and continues to be to not make it the over riding priority of the meet.  I know that I have said more than once and put it in writing that if you want to spend $100,000.00 on a $25,000.00 car, please do. 

 

Judging by definition is an exclusive activity to say that mine is better than yours.

 

What has been said by this group is that the club needs to be more inclusive and the way to be more inclusive is to make it more younger family friendly.  Not going after that group, the club will continue to decline in members.

 

As for financials, they were not published for three years.  This year is the first year in four that they were published.

 

If anyone would like to talk to me about my perspective, please give me a call.  I am in the directory or leave me a pm. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Brian_Heil said:

Thank you Pete. Well stated. 

 

Additional points on the PWD if I may. 

 

The PWD Interim Director appointed by the BOD, who did the attacking, was subsequently removed from his PWD position by the BOD.  I believe the BOD Minutes recording this action have yet to be posted. 

 

The PWD member who was elected PWD Director, chose to relinquish his position to make the PWD election a moot point, end any discussion on the election, who voted or who did not vote and revert the PWD Directorship back to Mr Shaw.  

 

The PWD has been working with the PWD Membership and the new BCA Office to improve the PWD membership roster.  Note this effort is not the Bugle PWD 2.0 article as that effort did not generate any shared information once that individual was removed by the BOD. 

Call me dumb but I found the three paragraphs hard to follow. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ted sweet said:

and will result in many on other side leaving the club?

Ted, I have no idea what you are talking about; errrr, well if you think one side or the other holds a whole half of the club, I think you're wrong.  I think 50% of the people want the ads and don't care one way or the other about the national meets which normally are too far away or the politics.  Personally, I went to a BCA Meet in Flint in 1971 & 1972 and to a national meet in Richmond, VA somewhere in the '90s AND Allentown.  I got a special invitation because I was #55 and under the first 100 members.  I thought that was nice, but I was introduced by name at the banquet.  I guess I need to comment on judging.  I'm a died in the wool Buick nut prior to 1950, and I like some individual years afterward.  For example I own a 1991 Buick Park Avenue show car.  But, I also like other American cars.  So, over the years I've been mostly dedicated to AACA....and I like what they do, with regard to Meets and Tours.  As to judging and restoration, you can restore almost any old car for somewhat reasonable costs, especially if you do the work yourself.  It's the original cost of some old as-is car that kills you.  All of my restorations used to be done in my garage and I won many big awards back in the day.  You can do it, as Johnny Cash said in the song, one piece at a time.  My most recent restoration cost me about $25,000 to do on what should have been a $1000-1200 car that cost me $20,000.  The idea, or as it's always been understood by me, is to conserve history and therefore build and show a car as close to the way it was sold new as  possible and that's what I've always done.  Oh yes, I've replaced babbitt bearings with inserts and a '39 Buick oil pump with a 1941-53 oil pump with larger gears, but that didn't show to the public.  You don't have to go trophy chasing just because you restore it where restoration is needed.  If it's worse than that, you should be driving it anyway.  If they don't look like the factory made them, then I personally don't see any point in having them if you can afford a more modern "beater" to drive to work.  I just got rid of a car that I felt the painter had done a sloppy paint job on.  I couldn't stand to look at it when I got it back.  So, say I'm particular. 😀

Edited by Dynaflash8 (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good thing is that you can choose to ignore the drama.

  • Like 9
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Smartin said:

The good thing is that you can choose to ignore the drama.

 

and hallelujah, I can do that now. Duh, so why the hell am I here. See y'all, I'm off to the great Okefenokee swamp, no cell, no internet... much safer there, only alligators and pesky blood suckin mosquitoes to deal with. Love ya all!!! (you too Terry :lol:)

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now