Jump to content

Bonfiglio/27th dispute


Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, whitedawn said:

You only see “clouds” because you want to. If this case didn’t have an appellate opinion or involve drum corps in some way, nobody would care. But since it did and it does, it’s a foothold for folks who have their knives out for certain individuals. 
 

Everybody else in the world measures these things by the success of the fiduciary relationship between the officers of the organization and the stakeholders they represent. In this case, the kids. 
 

Again, there is literally no way for anyone to steal money in a business that has any sort of minimal internal controls. Worrying that this will happen is just absurd.

I am a significant donor and the new organization, it’s board, and it’s CEO have my full and unwavering support. 

Since I was the individual who posted Denise’s appeal for funds, I have had personal messages that 1) Question if I actually marched in 27th in 1979. (For the record, I absolutely did,  and FU Disgruntled Post 1971 Drum Corps Enthusiast for suggesting otherwise, and insert as many”#” s that you think reflects my indignation for this insinuation). 2) Was I was bitter about the experience. (Yeah … right … it just was one of the best experiences of my life … though come to think of it … I was a little salty that Bridgemen were within a point of us at Finals, if that counts as being bitter).  And 3) How did I come by this super secret information? Well, I have tried to post the link, but I get a 403. For the sake of brevity let’s just say, I heard it from a friend, who heard it from a friend, who heard it from another that funds were being solicited. 

I have publicly stated that this a very sad situation … sibling against sibling is about as sad as it gets … and I only wondered about tax implications—a question asked and answered to my satisfaction, so I certainly hope that I am not being cast as a knife wielding assassin. 

Edited by Jurassic Lancer
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, whitedawn said:

Only if you want to see it that way. 

One was an objectively terrible manager who lied to the board, (allegedly) had an inappropriate relationship with YEA’s attorney (who mysteriously left her firm after 20+ years back when the bomb dropped in 2018 - total coincidence, I’m sure) and also, you know, sexually assaulted dozens of women while also being a #### businessperson and a compulsive liar. 
 

There was always a lot that would have caused his removal of the board had been functional at all. 

Nice dance around the “making it personal” subject I was discussing. IOW the only reason why someone would say anything against her is because of personal bias.

Edited by JimF-LowBari
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, whitedawn said:

Only if you want to see it that way. 

One was an objectively terrible manager who lied to the board, (allegedly)...

Numerous admin staff members had let Board members know that there were problems, but they chose to believe GH instead - which is a dictionary definition of being "willfully ignorant", cuz choosing to believe Hopkins over anyone else on the planet takes some doing. 😂 🙈

Edited by Slingerland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, NewToPosting said:

The guy that got dragged on their alumni forum for being drunk?  That guy?  I heard AG read him for filth, like he was late to count 1 in her flag block.  Straight up went in on his "leadership qualities".

Do you have evidence DB was a "big backer"?  Have you considered she may also be the reason he's no longer around?  She did work in insurance, so the concept of de-risking would not be new to her.

no idea i am not an alumni, so i dont follow pages of alumni corps i didn't march.

 

if the idea of risk isn't new, then there's some current soul searching to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, whitedawn said:

Comparing YEA to any legitimate business is like comparing a rotten flank steak to a wagyu filet. Theoretically the same kind of thing, but one actually functions correctly. 
 

At no time did YEA ever have a truly independent board or any internal controls on the CEO. It was a dumpster fire that had cooked books. 

i never called YEA legitimate. well a legitimate dumpster fire maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, whitedawn said:

You only see “clouds” because you want to. If this case didn’t have an appellate opinion or involve drum corps in some way, nobody would care. But since it did and it does, it’s a foothold for folks who have their knives out for certain individuals. 
 

Everybody else in the world measures these things by the success of the fiduciary relationship between the officers of the organization and the stakeholders they represent. In this case, the kids. 
 

Again, there is literally no way for anyone to steal money in a business that has any sort of minimal internal controls. Worrying that this will happen is just absurd.

I am a significant donor and the new organization, it’s board, and it’s CEO have my full and unwavering support. 

good be proud of your support. but don't think in many corners this isn't given a side eye glance and head shake

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...