perc2100 Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 Oh, good grief. Dan's response says it all. And crankiness is NOT limited to old people...we just enjoy it more. I agree that Dan seemingly responded perfectly: he is under zero obligation to answer those questions from a random email, though he did a great job politely explaining why he was not going to answer Mr. Blair's questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 And crank call from DCP or anyone else would probably qualify as harrassment more than a FB page..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 Letting it all mull about for a bit, I think there IS a specific argument that could be made for an IRS complaint (though Blair has not stated it). However, I don't think I will state it here in public, for obvious reasons. But you will post (currently) unsubstantiated innuendo about a non-profit that is seemingly squeaky-clean when it comes to the legal side?! Not cool to post garbage like this, Eleran: either say NOTHING, or say everything. Posting this makes you look (almost) as bad as Blair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleran Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 But you will post (currently) unsubstantiated innuendo about a non-profit that is seemingly squeaky-clean when it comes to the legal side?! Not cool to post garbage like this, Eleran: either say NOTHING, or say everything. Posting this makes you look (almost) as bad as Blair Fair enough, perc. That wasn't the way I meant it to come out. My apologies, and I've edited the prior post as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 15, 2014 Author Share Posted September 15, 2014 Yes, Jordan does have ownership interest in the Charlotte Hornets. So I suppose it could be said he has " influence on rules, hires, etc ". Fair point, and so noted. WOW! You admitted I'm right. No wonder the rest of my Saturday sucked LOL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 15, 2014 Author Share Posted September 15, 2014 Absolutely, but the original analogy dealt with Jordan's relationship with Nike, drawing a comparison to Cesario's relationship with FJM. The failure of the original analogy is that Jordan's shoes don't affect rules that influence competitive results. It could be argued that Cesario could influence rules in such a way that his designs are somehow rewarded competitively. (I'm not suggesting that this is the case, but my point is that it could be argued and such an argument is not unreasonable) depending on the surface on the sole of the shoes, it could affect rules, and I think somewhere along the way rules were passed about gimmicks etc on shoes. so yes, shoes can have impact on competitive results Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 15, 2014 Author Share Posted September 15, 2014 Well I found this document and it's well worth the read. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/tax-exempt_nonprofits_must_meet_inspection_and_disclosure_requirements.pdf Quite honestly anytime (IF) the IRS gets involved I would be concerned. Whether you want to poo poo and dismiss this post I dare say IF the IRS gets involved you won't be dismissing them. You can rant and rave all you want and at the end of the day it will probably be some guy in an office somewhere that has NO IDEA what DCI is but see's a multi-million dollar 501c3. Let THAT digest for a second about the real world. I just hope that there is no there-there but sometimes, when the IRS gets involved, there doesn't need to be AND THAT is what concerns me. many 501C's are multi million dollars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 15, 2014 Author Share Posted September 15, 2014 Hey Jeff Ream, since you must have joined his group to post to his FB page, would you be so kind as to invite him, even from me, into this thread, or the 990's thread or start a new one, where we can discuss his contentions? I'll take his 990 summations and you can take his judging accusations. Seriously, it'd be fun! gladly. One of his lapdogs is trying to fight his fight for him 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 15, 2014 Author Share Posted September 15, 2014 The big issue is do WE know all the judges and DCI administrators REPORT every penny($250/show) they are paid, to the IRS? Do DCI judges and administrators really want the IRS to start looking at this? i'm pretty sure they are 1099'd, so they would have to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 15, 2014 Author Share Posted September 15, 2014 I see what you're saying; that we don't know whether DCI does in fact violate IRS rules. But nobody has said they do. That's a different question from whether Blair's argument is invalid. We have plenty of evidence that it is. Consider the argument: I am a fish. Cheese is a gas. Ringo was a great drummer. --- Therefore: Grass is green. Even if the conclusion is true, the argument is still invalid. Even if DCI violates IRS rules, Blair is still a loon because his argument is loony. well anyone with a brain knows Ringo wasn;t a great drummer 1 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.