Theos-Talk Archives (May 1998 Message tl00097)

Jim:

There were a lot of discussions. All the discussions were on issues. At no
time I suggested there being conflict.

..mkr

At 06:42 AM 5/6/1998 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>Regarding some past threads,
>
>> M K Ramadoss wrote [to Bart]: Do you have any details of on what issues
>conflicts were as far as the
>> first two - Sy and Bing are concerned?
> 
>to which Bart replied,
>
>>        You have referred to them often enough.
>
>and Alan chipped in,
>
>>With respect, Bart, you do not answer the question, and Doss's reply to
>>the above suggests you are incorrect.
>
>with a minor chide for "unbrotherlyness," and Doss ended with
>
>></italic>I don't recall mentioning any conflict. I am not feigning
>ignorance.
>
>
>Were I Bart, I would probably have answered much the same way.  The posts
>on Bing -- or rather, the most recent series of threads on Bing -- was
>around the time of the election bylaws changes, as were most of Sy's posts.
> These went on for weeks, and anyone interested can pull up the old
>digests.  
>
>In a nutshell (for those who were not on theos-l at the time), Sy's
>"problems" involved Florida section elections and Bing's came from National
>elections some years back, both involving legal determinations from TSA hq
>on election procedures. The "not pro Algeo" faction of the TSA (trying not
>to write "anti-Algeo," which would be less correct) stems in large part
>from the way Bing was treated -- and some say unfairly denied the
>opportunity to head the American Society.   Since Algeo was the beneficiary
>*whether or not he was part of any allegedly unfair actions by hq* he
>naturally gets his share of the "anti-hq" feeling (and here, "anti"
>probably is accurate -- ala ACT, etc.).
>
>Doss, you may have forgotten, but they were both threads lasting more than
>a few days each and you did participate; does anything post here that you
>don't participate?  :)     Bart evidently remembers either the originals or
>followup-threads.
>
>Jim
>
>