simka2 Posted May 26, 2011 Author Share Posted May 26, 2011 I want to be clear. I'm not attributing motives. Simka and I arrived here at the boards at about the same time; although she is clearly a much more active member.:D I often read her comments with enjoyment. This thread surprised me. Having just watched a sweet thread about a Mother's enjoyment and pride in the accomplishment of her average child vs. her gifted one disintegrate within three pages, I was very skeptical that this thread about a divisive issue would remain civil. It seemed disingenouous/naive to express reluctance to discuss something that one is then opening a discussion about. Glad to say that so far the hive has surprised me. :hurray: No problem! I chose to not directly address your post, because I felt I already had. I'm sorry to hear about the other thread :glare:. And yes, I get to be very active!!! Due to a move (no social life) and finding some great new friends ;). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carol in Cal. Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I'm glad that the OP posted. It gives a little more 'original source' information about something that many of us had taken a large interest in. I can certainly understand the OP wanting to share info without wanted to stir up trouble--that is a pair of impulses that I often have myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephanier.1765 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 So if you truly hate to resurrect this. (Kerfuffle related) - why post the link? What could the possible outcomes of the conversation be? What are you hoping to acheive? For one, I'm glad she did. Otherwise I would have not been updated on the situation and for that I'm grateful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMCassandra Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I am sure there is some of that. I also knew there were people who were curious about GHC positon. It is my hope that this stays calm and just acts like a PSA. ;) Well, I for one, appreciate it. It brings some closure for me. I appreciated hearing this Christian mediation lawyer's perspective, especially since he is well acquainted with both parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colleen in NS Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Thanks for posting, simka. I would never have known this new info. otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amydavis Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I'm glad you posted this. I received the email also, since I wrote to them supporting their decision back during the kerfluffle. However, I wasn't sure how to link anyone to it, and I was worried about upsetting some people. Thanks for being braver and more technologically savvy than me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnitWit Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Thanks for the links! :001_smile: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susan in KY Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I got the same email. I really, truly appreciate GHC's class in all of this. Unfortunately, it's not going to change a lot of people's opinions. Apparently, something similar has happened before with AiG (backing out of mediation) a few years ago, when they split from CMI. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keptwoman Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 Thank you. Having followed the kerfluffle it is interesting to read the final conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennifer3141 Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 Seems to me the whole point is sharing a substantial amount of new information about a topic many here have shown interest in, but of which a great deal has been left to speculation. Sharing is good. :001_smile: :iagree: And did anyone else think, "Which kerfluffle?!?!?" :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mommy22alyns Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 :iagree: And did anyone else think, "Which kerfluffle?!?!?" :) I think that was Kerfluffle with a capital K! :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangermom Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I appreciated the information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 It was difficult for me to put into words at the time, but the very "silence" from GHC and the "noise" from Ken Ham was a huge tell for me. I had been in a similar situation at one time. I chose to jump thru every legal and relevent hoop presented to me (without it turning into a public mess) I wasn't able to defend myself. Eventually, I had all my ducks in row and the truth came out. My attacker was able to say whatever he wanted, for a time, but in the beginning I couldn't. I realize I was projecting on the GHC/Ken Ham situation, but when GHC remained silent I really started to wonder. What you learned takes a young lawyer about 5 years to grasp. Your instincts are very, very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simka2 Posted May 27, 2011 Author Share Posted May 27, 2011 What you learned takes a young lawyer about 5 years to grasp. Your instincts are very, very good. My grandfather (former State Legislator) always said I should have been a lawyer ;). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalanamak Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 So if you truly hate to resurrect this. (Kerfuffle related) - why post the link? What could the possible outcomes of the conversation be? What are you hoping to acheive? Just information. AFAIR, the vast majority of this Kerfuffle was extra-Board. She was "hating to resurrect this" as a way of saying it was important, but that she wanted to soften the intrusion on SWB, who has tired of the topic. That was my take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in WI Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 Thank you very much for posting this. IRL, I am surrounded by pro-Ham people. I would not have the info I have had without this board. I certainly wouldn't have seen this new info. which, hopefully, puts the final nail in the kerfluffle coffin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdalley Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 :iagree: And did anyone else think, "Which kerfluffle?!?!?" :) The one with K as in 'Kilt' as in men in kilts... :tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I have to ask: Where did the extra L in "kerfluffle" come from? Someone mentioned the GHC letter on Ken Ham's FB page recently and expressed disgust that they were "slandering" him. :tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehogs4 Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 So if you truly hate to resurrect this. (Kerfuffle related) - why post the link? What could the possible outcomes of the conversation be? What are you hoping to acheive? :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simka2 Posted May 27, 2011 Author Share Posted May 27, 2011 :iagree: Just information. AFAIR, the vast majority of this Kerfuffle was extra-Board. She was "hating to resurrect this" as a way of saying it was important, but that she wanted to soften the intrusion on SWB, who has tired of the topic. That was my take. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angela in ohio Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 (edited) It was difficult for me to put into words at the time, but the very "silence" from GHC and the "noise" from Ken Ham was a huge tell for me. I had been in a similar situation at one time. I chose to jump thru every legal and relevent hoop presented to me (without it turning into a public mess) I wasn't able to defend myself. Eventually, I had all my ducks in row and the truth came out. My attacker was able to say whatever he wanted, for a time, but in the beginning I couldn't. I realize I was projecting on the GHC/Ken Ham situation, but when GHC remained silent I really started to wonder. I had a similar situation about a year ago, though not with a physical attack. I was attempting to follow mediation as closely as possible, but the other person was talking, talking, talking to anyone who would listen, and it was a pack of lies. I still don't share my side, out of good faith, though mediation has long been broken down. Once you've been in the situation yourself, you get a good sense for it. I thought the same thing during the AIG/GHC issues. Edited May 27, 2011 by angela in ohio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalanamak Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I was attempting to follow mediation as closely as possible, but the other person was talking, talking, talking to anyone who would listen, and it was a pack of lies. "The lady doth protesteth too much, methinks." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoutTN Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 It is good to have more information. Thanks for posting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.