The official report of the July incidents at the susan-boyle.com forum has been altered. The correction does not appear to have been done in the usual way such corrections are made, that is with an addendum which is agreed to by all signers. But that is just as well. If all necessary corrections to the report were included as addenda, the addenda would be nearly as long as the report itself.
For the record, here is the original, with the deleted sections in red and the added words in blue.
"We have explored the issue of the banned members. It seems that in actual fact only one banned member reappeared. was readmitted, and that one of the temporary admin appointed by Lchris has said she admitted this person as she thought that the amnesty which had been discussed by PT, Kalua, and Lchris towards previously banned members had commenced. This was a perfectly understandable position for her to take. Two members who had left rejoined. However, rumours abounded that ‘many’ banned members were reappearing, so why was it felt that this was happening? It would seem that much like when someone goes into a crowded building and shouts “fire” even when there is no fire, a lot of individuals will see smoke. In short the board has concluded that the forum experienced a form of panic reaction which is a well documented forum phenomenon. What people saw and felt was real to them and there was a domino effect as people reacted and expressed their concerns."
While I do appreciate that this section of the report has finally been corrected, I have to wonder why it was included in the first place. Both Pickled Tink and Truus knew that Citroenlady did not admit a banned member, could not have admitted a banned member, yet they approved the official report. It is not as if they could ‘forget’ something that they knew never happened. Why did they knowingly include a false statement?
I find another paragraph from the report interesting. It is the one about Kalua and the origins of the “mistrust”.
"Things started off well and amicably between all, then Kalua was accused of rigging the auction, of being some one else, of being Paul Wood (previous owner) of lying about a family bereavement, and of being a SONY employee. The mistrust grew and Kalua understandably refused to work with individuals who were mistrusting him in this manner. He withdrew from his position and for the rest of the staff relations became to say the least strained. All parties were very committed to getting the process moving but the misinformation spread by the troll (see below) hindered the process and both sides agree that there was considerable mistrust on both sides."
Like many points in the report, the timeline is confused. Dyebat and lchris did not start off mistrusting Kalua. Kalua started off mistrusting them.
Lchris had no agenda except securing the site for the members. Dyebat agreed, but had an additional concern. Dyebat wanted to make sure that two areas which were important to members, the DDB and prayer threads, remained on the forum. There was nothing in their intentions that should have made anyone suspicious.
The site was to be owned by fans as a non-profit organization and information was needed in order to set up the NPO. If the NPO was to be legal, the people in charge of running it needed to be identifiable real people, not just internet avatars. This was confirmed by others posting on the transparency thread who had experience with non-profit organizations.
The site was to be owned by fans as a non-profit organization and information was needed in order to set up the NPO. If the NPO was to be legal, the people in charge of running it needed to be identifiable real people, not just internet avatars. This was confirmed by others posting on the transparency thread who had experience with non-profit organizations.
One member posted about her experience setting up an NPO. She stated that “a corporation is formed by real people at actual physical addresses” and said they had to get information from every board member and the executive director. Dyebat and lchris did not require the identifying information to harass Kalua, but because they were trying to set up a legal non-profit corporation.
Another reason Kalua’s information was necessary was to allow the forum to obtain insurance. The board must be able to indemnify the NPO against legal jeopardy. The by-laws state that the directors, officers and committee members “shall be indemnified by the corporation to the fullest extent permissible”. It makes no sense to indemnify the board members and committee members and not the administrator of the site.
Why might SBFII need such insurance? This may be a far-fetched example, but what if someone on the forum posted a thread filled with false and defamatory statements and innuendo about other forum members? What if staff/admin refused to enforce their own rules and remove the thread? What if they had even had a heads-up about the thread before it was posted, yet allowed it? The defamed members could decide to sue. Wouldn’t that put the corporation at risk? If someone has the potential to put the corporation at risk, shouldn’t the board be able to know who he is so they can obtain insurance?
As Dyebat and lchris held discussions with the admins about the forum sale and transition, something unusual became apparent. Both of the people in charge of running the forum were very secretive. Neither would speak to Dyebat and lchris on the phone or Skype and neither would allow their photos to be posted as they claimed it would place them in danger. These two were to be the Director, and Asst. Director of the non-profit!
Kalua would provide no identification at all. He wanted to contribute toward the purchase of the fansite, but insisted it had to be a donation. However, Dyebat intended that all contributions be treated as loans and repaid. Kalua refused to provide information for repayment of his intended $400 loan, claiming he didn’t want to be reimbursed because it was against the rules of his company. To lend $400 to a Susan Boyle fansite was against the rules? In the end, the money was loaned by a Board member.
As Dyebat and lchris held discussions with the admins about the forum sale and transition, something unusual became apparent. Both of the people in charge of running the forum were very secretive. Neither would speak to Dyebat and lchris on the phone or Skype and neither would allow their photos to be posted as they claimed it would place them in danger. These two were to be the Director, and Asst. Director of the non-profit!
Kalua would provide no identification at all. He wanted to contribute toward the purchase of the fansite, but insisted it had to be a donation. However, Dyebat intended that all contributions be treated as loans and repaid. Kalua refused to provide information for repayment of his intended $400 loan, claiming he didn’t want to be reimbursed because it was against the rules of his company. To lend $400 to a Susan Boyle fansite was against the rules? In the end, the money was loaned by a Board member.
Multiple first-hand experiences led Dyebat and lchris to wonder just who Kalua was representing and what was going on. Asking questions about him made some staff members very angry. Why did the staff insist on protecting him at the members' expense? None of this made sense. Strangely, no one else thought it odd…….
To make matters worse, the ‘reason’ Kalua gave for not providing any identification would have been cheesy in a cheap spy novel. It was not at all credible in the real world. If it were true, should he be ‘hiding’ as administrator of a very popular forum representing one of the most famous women in the world?
Again, no one other than lchris and Dyebat was concerned. If true, it potentially placed other staff and members in jeopardy. If false, it was a very serious deception.
Eventually, Pickled Tink provided adequate identifying information. But Kalua still refused to provide identifying information of any kind or to speak with Dyebat or lchris. This is in spite of the fact that Lonni claimed she had spoken with him by phone.
Others claimed (after the fact) that they had Kalua’s contact information. However, Dyebat and lchris, who were supposed to be given this information to file for the NPO, never received it. Was this just another diversionary tactic?
Kalua chose to resign, citing “personal reasons”, rather than provide any identifying information. Much has been said about “mistrust” of Kalua by Dyebat and lchris, but the fact is that he gave them many reasons to question his veracity. There were (and still are) legitimate questions about Kalua’s role and identity.
This had nothing to do with the troll. Dyebat’s and lchris’s questions did not come from the troll, but resulted from Kalua’s own words and actions. The mistrust on their part arose as result of Kalua’s reluctance to trust Dyebat and lchris enough to speak with them or provide any information at all. Why would he not do this? Have their questions ever been answered?
Yet they were accused of trying to “get rid of” staff. At no time was this true. In fact, they defended them and worked very hard to train and retain them all. Even now, after being lied to and lied about for six months by several staff members, they just want to know the truth. What are some of the staff covering up? And why?
The Board was informed of these issues on August 4th, with documentation. They were to question Kalua before his return to work for the forum in a management position as an admin. On August 15th, the Board unanimously welcomed him back as co-admin. Were any questions asked of him at his meeting before the Board?
Dyebat and lchris had nothing against Kalua or any staff member. Dyebat and lchris both admire and respect the never-ending hours of service that all staff have given to the forum, often under very difficult circumstances. They recognize the hundreds of hours, of sometimes difficult staff discussions, that led to many positive changes for all members. Yet they were accused of trying to “get rid of” staff. At no time was this true. In fact, they defended them and worked very hard to train and retain them all. Even now, after being lied to and lied about for six months by several staff members, they just want to know the truth. What are some of the staff covering up? And why?
I have a few questions of my own.
Kalua resigned around the same time that Lonni sent out the email saying the entire staff was prepared to resign. Was the entire episode in which the staff resigned simply a ploy to get members clamoring for the return of Kalua (to allow him to return without providing identification)?
Does Kalua work for anyone representing Susan Boyle or her team, paid or unpaid?
Did the Board ask questions about this matter before allowing him back as admin? Did they get answers?
