This plays in to what some of us said already, that this day is about dd, not business. If he won't do it for you, would he be more open to the idea that this might turn off dd's friends' parents, impacting her beyond this one day? It may be wrong, but if I was most concerned about this one particular day, I'd be inclined to take an "us vs. them" approach with dh: "You know I support you honey, but some people can be very narrow-minded about these kinds of businesses, and I'm concerned that it might have negative consequences for dd if you upset her friends' parents." If you think it's just a phase that will run its course if you can get past the party, that might be the way to go. It obviously won't help much if this is going to be an ongoing problem for the foreseeable future; you'll just wind up fighting this same fight again down the road. FWIW, my parents were die-hard Amway-ers when I was a teenager, so I understand just how defensive people can be about these things.

I would say that you admire his enthusiasm and ambition, but that this is a day for focusing on dd and not on business.

Every public school teacher I had through probably 8th grade had one of those... usually embellished with apples or pencils and rulers! :lol:

Welcome! :seeya:

DH's brother is 3.5 years older. They talk on the phone or FaceTime at least 2-3 times/week. BIL used to live out of state; now he lives about 45 minutes away. DH sees him a couple of times a month. Used to be a little less when he was further away, but they would always see each other when BIL was in town. He doesn't have kids and their parents are here, so BIL always came here instead of DH going there. They often make plans to watch a ballgame or just hang out and talk. I would describe them as quite close. However, it is definitely close in a different way from my sister and me. She lives 6 hours away and we talk probably less than DH and BIL. But when we do talk, it's about deeper things, such as relationship issues, things that have upset us or made us really happy, etc. Whereas DH and BIL tend to talk more about their favorite teams or something funny they saw on TV. It sounds more like what I would call chit-chat, BUT it is their way of bonding. It works for them.

After all your thoughtful responses, I think I have DH convinced that this is a really, really bad idea. Actually, I'm not sure that he ever thought it was a GOOD idea; he just wanted these guys off his back. We drafted an email for him to send this morning; he wants to get some feedback from his mentor (who's not involved in the situation) first. He'll also be contacting his HR rep to report the overpayment and see what steps he needs to take. At least it will be on record that he reported that he was overpaid. It's not at all unusual for reps in his office to thank each other for referrals with small gifts or lunch out. It's a schmooz-y kind of place like that. At any rate, to me this is a much different situation than buying your buddy a thank-you lunch. If payroll had never been involved, it would be one thing. But if there were to be an internal audit that caught the mistake, DH is the one whose neck would be on the line. As I said, I feel for the guy, commission mistakes are a headache, but this is not DH's mistake to fix. The full commission should have belonged to him anyway, but he didn't throw a hissy fit over sharing it, even though he would have been well within his rights to do so. Fifty percent is better than nothing, even if it's late -- right?

Hm, the chargeback. Another issue I hadn't considered. Yes, it's possible that it could be charged back, although that doesn't happen frequently. Excellent point, thank you.

Oh, I totally agree. We've been on the other end of commission screw-ups, and it's a real PITA. I feel for the guy.

I hadn't even thought about him being liable for taking too much money. Good point. Actually, payroll is not yet aware of the mistake, to my knowledge. Today was payday so I think all this unfolded throughout the afternoon. DH's team was in the middle of a project and hasn't had a chance to resolve it yet. HOWEVER, all four people involved do acknowledge there was a mistake made, and the company will most certainly fix the mistake once payroll is notified. The issue is that the co-worker does not want to wait on payroll. The amount of money in question is not huge, but big enough, IYKWIM.

There is a whole driving tour I came across online awhile back, going to the various places she lived. I'm determined to drag dd along on that one someday!!!

To clarify: Paperwork to correct the mistake hasn't been filed. I don't know what the chance is that payroll will figure it out and correct it on their own. I would assume not good. Just in case that changes anything for anybody. :p ETA: Payday was today.

DH and I are on opposite sides of this issue, so I just wondered what others' take would be. Some background: DH works in sales for a large telecom corporation. His specialty is healthcare accounts. He is the only rep in his area who can sell to healthcare providers, but he is ONLY allowed to sell to healthcare providers. Other reps have specialties as well, but some are general reps who can sell anywhere, except for those specialties that are protected (e.g, healthcare). Because of the restrictions, reps (including DH) sometimes come across opportunities (via referrals or whatever) that they can't sell, and they pass these off to the appropriate colleague. The general rule is that any contract sold within a specialty stays with that specialty rep, but on occasion, reps agree to split commission with the referring rep. There is a protocol for doing this via the corporate payroll department. DH's colleague (let's call him C) passed off a healthcare opportunity to DH, which DH sold. The commission technically belonged 100% to DH because this is in his specialty. However, DH's manager and C's manager agreed to split the commission 50/50 (managers, of course, are judged by their teams' sales figures, so this sometimes happens; it's part of the game). All of the appropriate paperwork was filled out, signed off on, and submitted to HR. Someone in payroll made a mistake, however, and credited 100% of the commission to DH. C is very upset and has been hounding DH incessantly. (There have been ongoing issues with C since he joined the company a few months ago. He is getting a reputation for making a pest of himself, sending copious irrelevant texts and emails, leaving 3-minute rambling voicemails, etc. -- not just to DH but to their other co-workers as well.) He has accused DH of conspiring to "take" his half of the commission (impossible, since both managers would have had to have signed off on a change and payroll is processed in another state; DH doesn't even know anyone in payroll). Payroll will fix the mistake (take 50% of the commission out of DH's check and give it to C), but it will be at least one pay period before that happens. C is complaining that he needs the money now in order to have his car repaired and is bugging the heck out of everyone involved. C's manager and DH's manager have told DH to cut C a check for his half from our personal account just to shut him up. Would you be comfortable paying a co-worker out of your personal bank account in order to correct the company's payroll mistake?

This part really resonated with me: Most people I have encountered have been relatively positive when they learn that we homeschool third grade. But many have said, "Oh, just wait. You'll want to send her back to school when she's a teenager!" Maybe that's true; dd is only 8 so time will tell. But right now, the best part about homeschool is how much fun we have together. We can take the time to explore the things she loves, and we bond over books and topics that we find piques both our interests. We spent all morning putting together a display board for her science fair project, combining her love of cooking and science and my affinity for crafts and organization. It was great! She just brought me a handmade card that said, "Thank you, Mom." We go swimming in the middle of the day and out for lunch. We rarely had time for such things when our routine was work-school-homework-sports practice-bed-get up and do it again.

I still call him Wesley when he needs it... ;) Our ds's middle name is Stephen. DH was fussing at him the other day and used his first and middle names. Later, ds got frustrated with dh and hollered, "Daddy Stephen!!"

My dh is named Wesley! But everybody calls hims Wes. He can't stand NOT to have his name shortened!

Thanks... I've been on the waiting list for Pioneer Girl for ages and I thought I'd missed out!

My name (Whitney) was fairly uncommon when I was a kid. I got an occasional Whitley but more often Lindsay or Courtney. My married name is not that strange, but dh's family does not pronounce it in the way most people read it. No one can spell it after just hearing it pronounced. I've gotten so I immediately spell it after I say it because otherwise I just get a blank stare. I have had a few people ask why we pronounce it that way, and I just say, "I don't know, it's not my name; it came with the spouse." If it didn't bother dh so much, I might go back to my maiden name. I have considered secretly changing my pronunciation to the one that makes the most phonetic sense... :leaving: I hate to have my name shortened, especially by people I don't know well, but I will usually let it go. My ds has a name that is commonly shortened, and I insist on using his full name. If he decides to go by a nickname when he's older, that's up to him (but I'll always call him by his full name). I have a friend who named her son Tylor (pronounced Tyler). She gets super aggravated when people misspell/mispronounce his name. Her tirades always leave me wondering why she decided to spell it that way. Some folks really like the uniqueness of an uncommon name; I get that. But why set yourself up if it's just going to make you mad when people get it wrong?

Me too. When dd was about 5, she giggled for days over her very literal mental image of a "panty hose..." (And I also use "switching.")

It was a little colder than usual here those days, but NOWHERE NEAR what you're talking about. We weren't braving frostbite temps. And it had only warmed about 3 or 4 degrees by the time they actually did go to school, so I'm not really sure what was accomplished.

That's correct. She just jumps forward a bit between books. It's Plum Creek, then Silver Lake, then Long Winter, Little Town, and Happy Golden Years, IIRC.

A couple of weeks ago, our public schools went on a two-hour delay two days in a row because it was COLD. No precipitation forecast. I kid you not.

IIRC, the Nazarene church comes from the Wesleyan-holiness tradition, in which case this would be directly related to Wesley's perfectionism teaching, which I referenced above. I can't speak to whether or not most Nazarene churches still subscribe to the teaching, but certainly the Wesley brothers have had a strong influence on several denominations. I think the official Methodist doctrine probably doesn't take it quite to this extreme, but I would have to do some research on that. [PS... I admit that my gut reaction to the bolded is, "Good luck with that." ;) ]

A friend named her sons Tsion (Zion) and Salem.

Agree with the above, for the most part. I tend to see sanctification as more of a process that takes the remainder of our earthly lives and is not fully realized until heaven. It's the process of becoming more and more like Christ. But while it's not instantaneous, it's also not an optional outcome, but an inevitable reality. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones said: "You cannot receive Christ as your justification only, and then, later, decide to refuse or to accept Him as your sanctification. He is one and indivisible, and if you receive Him at all, at once He is made unto you 'wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption.' You cannot receive Him as your Saviour only, and later decide to accept or refuse Him as your Lord; for the Saviour is the Lord who by His death has [bought] us and therefore owns us. Sanctification is nowhere taught or offered in the New Testament as some additional experience possible to the believer. It is represented rather as something which is already within the believer, something which he must realise more and more and in which he must grow increasingly." I will also add that I believe sanctification is as fully a product of grace as justification. IOW, it is a result of God working in us, renewing our minds and transforming us more and more into his image, not a result of "trying harder." I say this because I've heard WAY too much morality-centered preaching that says, "you gotta, you gotta, you gotta" and not nearly enough that says, "Jesus did, Jesus did, Jesus did." That seems to me to be directly related to the misunderstanding that post-conversion Christians are somehow responsible for their own sanctification. I am United Methodist, although my views on sanctification are probably more informed by the Reformed traditions. Wesley was well known for preaching Christian perfectionism, a model to which I simply cannot subscribe. My pastor may or may not endorse my answer. :001_smile:

We have one of those bouncy horses -- it's called a Rockin' Rider Pony. My parents bought it last year, so I know they're still around. But he might outgrow that faster than a trampoline. I think I have seen those in the One Step Ahead catalog?