Welcome James Carrion
SeanF...@gmail.com
organization. As you know, all members on this list are considered
members of The Anomaly Response Network.
On a side note, it appears James was not happy with the last post to
this group, which may have prompted him to join.
Today (March 25, 2007) an email came in from James P. Carrion,
International Director for MUFON threatening legal action for
defamation and libel in my article, "Where MUFON and Wikipedia
Intersect", in which I constructively criticized the organization and
offered suggestions for improvement.
At his request, I removed copies of my article from The Searchlight
and our humble Google Group - so this is where it went if you are
trying to locate it.
Before removing the article, I received a comment from one MUFON State
Section Director:
"That is a fantastic, excellent article you wrote. I would like to
post a comment on what you wrote. It would be about Mufon and how I
think we were censored in our Gaffney report. They took the OLD [pre-
conclusion] report and inserted a few lines from final report, added
pictures, and a few other things."
This simply reinforces the attitude of the MUFON membership that I
conveyed through my article. Basically they're fed up with the status-
quo, the sale of a Journal over the pursuit of a science, and would
like to see things change. If something turns out to be questionable,
instead of "leaving out" the aspects of a report that make it
questionable, MUFON, just like any other respectable UFO organization,
should point out those aspects and either thoroughly investigate them
or let them be known. Any scientific report must include an "Error
Analysis" as we learned in high school science class. For those of us
in Ufology, including a list of "unknowns" is our error analysis (at
least a start, anyways).
The rest of my article was about the typical MUFON member's
frustration with the lack of expenditure reports on the MUFON website.
Most (if not all) MUFON members I've spoke to would like to be able to
visualize where their $50/year dues are going aside from the Journal
costs. They'd also like to be able to have input on the direction of
their organization, but as you can see from my experience, input is
not welcome.
I'd like to remind everyone here in ARN that your input is welcome.
That's what this list is for.
Cheers,
Sean Feeney
Director, The Anomaly Response Network
James Carrion
Please see my comments below.
> Today (March 25, 2007) an email came in from James P. Carrion,
> International Director for MUFON threatening legal action for
> defamation and libel in my article, "Where MUFON and Wikipedia
> Intersect", in which I constructively criticized the organization and
> offered suggestions for improvement.
Your article had no constructive critcisms, only baseless assertions,
placing yourself in legal jeopardy.
I communicated with you privately to get the article removed but you
seem bent on taking this to the court of public opinion. MUFON is a
decent and ethical organization and I will not allow you to rashly and
needlessly drag our good name through your mud.
> Before removing the article, I received a comment from one MUFON State
> Section Director:
>
> "That is a fantastic, excellent article you wrote. I would like to
> post a comment on what you wrote. It would be about Mufon and how I
> think we were censored in our Gaffney report. They took the OLD [pre-
> conclusion] report and inserted a few lines from final report, added
> pictures, and a few other things."
One positive response is not proof of endorsement of your baseless
arguments. When did this alleged change of report occur? Was it
during my tenure as MUFON Director or twenty years ago? Was it done by
the State Director or at the International level? Was it an isolated
incident or repeated? Regardless, you simply have no way to justify
the complete falsehoods that were in your original article.
> This simply reinforces the attitude of the MUFON membership that I
> conveyed through my article. Basically they're fed up with the status-
> quo, the sale of a Journal over the pursuit of a science, and would
> like to see things change. If something turns out to be questionable,
> instead of "leaving out" the aspects of a report that make it
> questionable, MUFON, just like any other respectable UFO organization,
> should point out those aspects and either thoroughly investigate them
> or let them be known. Any scientific report must include an "Error
> Analysis" as we learned in high school science class. For those of us
> in Ufology, including a list of "unknowns" is our error analysis (at
> least a start, anyways).
Another baseless remark. Why do you claim to speak for the MUFON
membership? What do you believe that you know what the status quo is
for MUFON when you have not been a member since 2004?
> The rest of my article was about the typical MUFON member's
> frustration with the lack of expenditure reports on the MUFON website.
> Most (if not all) MUFON members I've spoke to would like to be able to
> visualize where their $50/year dues are going aside from the Journal
> costs. They'd also like to be able to have input on the direction of
> their organization, but as you can see from my experience, input is
> not welcome.
Claiming that MUFON swindles the public, does not spend its income on
member services or lab analysis, cheats its members of their dues,
etc. is completely untrue. Why do you think you can make such libelous
claims freely without offering any support for your statements?
Another generality you just made was that "input is not welcome".
Nothing could be further from the truth. If you take the time to get
your facts straight, make true constructive criticisms and communicate
directly, your suggestions and comments willl be taken to heart.
Sean Feeney
2) Nothing I said was false. I do not need to justify my commentary outside of the already cited sources because this is, indeed, what your membership feels. Either fess up to this fact and change your organization for the better or your membership might look elsewhere. You have a real chance to save your organization here if you stop feeling personally threatened and look at the bigger picture.
3) I claim to speak for the MUFON membership because I am a good friend of the organization, with many contacts in many state chapters. The disappointment with current MUFON practices is across the board: the membership wishes to see the organization focus on scientific responsibility rather than sales.
4) I have communicated my suggestions to the organization on several occasions. Prior to your tenure I sent them directly to John S., who never once responded to my concerns. I once received a reply from his wife who also did not know why he was not responding to my suggestions. It is great to see that you are at least reading your membership's concerns now, but attacking them is not the solution. You should be taking them to heart and using them to make ethical decisions on the future of your organization.
5) I did not claim that MUFON does not spend its income on member services or somehow cheats its membership out of their dues. I asserted that the general feeling amongst the MUFON membership is that the yearly dues are outrageous and that they would like to easily know why the fees are so high by seeing expenditure reports posted on your website. This is common practice among 501(c)3 organizations, and it is very difficult for the average MUFON member to keep track of their organizations' accountability without them.
I did claim that it is against scientific ethics to prevent the inclusion of other scientists work simply because they do not pay your organization. MUFON is a volunteer organization built on the hard work of field investigators and state directors who spend a significant amount of their personal time to build the organization and who are not monetarily compensated. It is the feeling of the membership that this should go all the way up the organization, and that no one higher up should be drawing a salary from these membership dues. Further, the members have the brilliant idea of turning the MUFON Journal into an online publication which would significantly lower operational costs.
Obviously input must not be welcome because you're threatening legal action against a 20-year-old engineering student who has been a valued asset to your organization for upwards of seven years and who was simply trying to help, as he has been trying to do those whole seven years. Good luck attracting new college-aged membership after this.
Yours truly,
Sean Feeney
James Carrion
On Mar 26, 3:04 pm, "Sean Feeney" <seanfro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1) None of my assertions were baseless and sources were cited. I removed the
> article as you requested, but this does speak wonders to your memberships
> feeling of "being censored." MUFON's ethics have been questioned by many
> people many times before my article - nothing I said was new. As MUFON's new
> International Director, you will need to be able to take criticisms and turn
> them into positives for your organization. Criticism gives us a chance to
> grow, and that's something MUFON really needs to do.
Please cite concrete evidence in support of the following assertions
you made in your first article:
False assertion # 1: "James P. Carrion, a MUFON member for a mere 11
years, was elected overnight as the new MUFON International Director"
False assertion # 2: "The MUFON Business Board is made up of nine
MUFON elite and their meetings are held in private"
False assertion # 3: "The membership have no right to petition against
officers who they feel are not successfully doing their job"
False assertion # 4: "MUFON's key goal has not been 'to resolve the
mystery known as unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and all of its
related ramifications in a scientific manner" as their mission
statement would suggestion, but to increase regular membership - to
sell stocks, if you will - and to increase turnout at national
conventions - to sell product."
False assertion # 5: "Despite startling evidence disproving (or at
least not proving) the sightings (see "A Close Encounter with Jerry
Black"), MUFON embraced the author- witness and MUFON officers even
helped him publish his book (with
questionable monetary donations)."
False assertion #6: "One of those is not to swindle the general public
of its hard earned cash and then not use that raised money to further
the scientific goal of the organization."
False assertion # 7: "I think most MUFON members would be shocked to
know how little of their yearly dues actually go towards field
investigations and lab research and analysis."
You can't cry 'censorship' when you are caught telling lies.
>
> 2) Nothing I said was false. I do not need to justify my commentary outside
> of the already cited sources because this is, indeed, what your membership
> feels. Either fess up to this fact and change your organization for the
> better or your membership might look elsewhere. You have a real chance to
> save your organization here if you stop feeling personally threatened and
> look at the bigger picture.
Please see the false claims you made above. Yes, you do have to
justify your comments, otherwise it is slander and libel.
> 3) I claim to speak for the MUFON membership because I am a good friend of
> the organization, with many contacts in many state chapters. The
> disappointment with current MUFON practices is across the board: the
> membership wishes to see the organization focus on scientific responsibility
> rather than sales.
> 4) I have communicated my suggestions to the organization on several
> occasions. Prior to your tenure I sent them directly to John S., who never
> once responded to my concerns. I once received a reply from his wife who
> also did not know why he was not responding to my suggestions. It is great
> to see that you are at least reading your membership's concerns now, but
> attacking them is not the solution. You should be taking them to heart and
> using them to make ethical decisions on the future of your organization.
That does not give you the right to make false claims.
>
> 5) I did not claim that MUFON does not spend its income on member services
> or somehow cheats its membership out of their dues. I asserted that the
> general feeling amongst the MUFON membership is that the yearly dues are
> outrageous and that they would like to easily know why the fees are so high
> by seeing expenditure reports posted on your website. This is common
> practice among 501(c)3 organizations, and it is very difficult for the
> average MUFON member to keep track of their organizations' accountability
> without them.
Please see the false claims above that came verbatim out of your
original article.
> I did claim that it is against scientific ethics to prevent the inclusion of
> other scientists work simply because they do not pay your organization.
> MUFON is a volunteer organization built on the hard work of field
> investigators and state directors who spend a significant amount of their
> personal time to build the organization and who are not monetarily
> compensated. It is the feeling of the membership that this should go all the
> way up the organization, and that no one higher up should be drawing a
> salary from these membership dues. Further, the members have the brilliant
> idea of turning the MUFON Journal into an online publication which would
> significantly lower operational costs.
>
> Obviously input must not be welcome because you're threatening legal action
> against a 20-year-old engineering student who has been a valued asset to
> your organization for upwards of seven years and who was simply trying to
> help, as he has been trying to do those whole seven years. Good luck
> attracting new college-aged membership after this.
Being 20 years old does not give you the right to slander or libel. If
you want to make constructive change, there is a proper and ethical
way of doing that. It starts by taking personal responsibility for
your words and actions. If your idea of helping MUFON is to slander
the organization, you are misguided indeed.
> Yours truly,
> Sean Feeney
> > > Director, The Anomaly Response Network- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sean Feeney
"The word "overnight" may have been out of place, but it was used to indicate a quick transition that was not widely, publicly announced (the yearly symposium, with its large entry fee, was not considered public in this case, even though it is open to the public for this fee). Was it announced in the published symposium proceedings? Was there a forum (or at least a request for input) for MUFON membership to discuss the future of their organization? You are not personally attacked in the article - you are only mentioned as the new leader with a link to your public bio."
True assertion #2: No executive meeting minutes are posted on your website, and there is no public calendar there listing the date of these meeting that you claim are open to the public.
True assertion #3: As stated in your own by-laws:
"ARTICLE II: MEMBERSHIP
Membership privileges may be terminated for failure to remit annual dues and/or for unlawful, unethical or abusive behavior."
"ARTICLE IV: CORPORATION OFFICERS
The Corporate Officers of MUFON shall be: (1) International Director (President), (2) Corporate Secretary, and (3) Corporate Treasurer. The corporate officers, named by the Board of Directors, may succeed themselves for an unspecified number of terms."
"ARTICLE VI: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 6: Removal
In addition to the criteria set forth under Article II, a board member may be removed for failure to participate in three consecutive board meetings."
None of your by-laws call for a method for your membership to directly petition for the removal of an officer.
True assertion #4: I challenge you to prove that you have resolved the UFO mystery in a scientific manner. What can be proven, however, is that people who do not pay for access to your club do not get to participate in national activities. As you stated in your email, " Non profits are beholden to the public by offering public services." I would claim that by preventing the impoverished from participating in your organization - and remember, many of the world's great scientists were indeed in this boat - you are not helping the public or helping to resolve the UFO mystery.
True assertion #5: Source is cited. Take up your beef on this one with Jerry Black directly. As I stated in my email:
"...the fact remains that after investigating a sighting, Maccabee teamed up with the witness to write a book and there is money involved. This simply isn't credible. As a supposed scientist, Maccabee and crew should not be selling books and earning money - they should be publishing research papers in peer-reviewed journals instead. This is why, as I've been told by employed scientists in traditional fields multiple times, they don't take us seriously in this field. In accordance with MUFON's stated purpose and mission, MUFON should be resolving such issues."
True assertion #6: This is what I've been told is the general feeling by a great many people both inside and outside of your organization. I am not stating it as a fact - since you don't post your organization's financial statements online, no one can hold you accountable enough to prove this either way. But this fact regarding your financial statements availability to your membership is indeed what has caused this general sentiment and could readily be resolved if you heed their and my call to post the MUFON income and expenditure reports on your website. You cannot argue with a feeling, but you can change it if you just try.
True assertion #7: I challenge you to prove that the majority of MUFON's income is spent on field investigations, lab research and analysis.
I think we will simply have to agree to disagree on who is caught telling the lies here, and you really should consult council on the definitions of slander and libel. You actually have to prove that my commentary is false, and since they are regarding a general feeling or sentiment and simply calling a 501(c)3 to action on those feelings, you can't prove anything illegal took place. I was not attacking any persons or organizations. What you can do is stop threatening me with legal action and start working on the task of saving your organization from the slump it has found itself in.
Being 20 years old certainly does not give me any right to slander or libel which is why nothing I said was slander or libel. As a responsible and ethical scientist, I simply gave your organization some suggestions on how to improve your reputation. That you would turn this into some sort of personal attack does speak to my age - the mere notion that you, as the International Director of MUFON, would threaten legal action because I notified you about what your members and the public felt and offered you suggestions on how to fix those feelings is completely and utterly ridiculous. Your own actions here are what is not helping MUFON.
Best of luck,
Sean Feeney
Director, The Anomaly Response Network
James Carrion
Since you started this by comparing MUFON with Wikipedia, I would
suggest looking at the Wikipedia definition for slander and libel:
In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a
false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm
the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government
or nation. Most jurisdictions allow legal actions, civil and/or
criminal, to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against
criticism.
The common law origins of defamation lie in the torts of slander
(harmful statement in a transitory form, especially speech) and libel
(harmful statement in a fixed medium, especially writing but also a
picture, sign, or electronic broadcast), each of which gives a common
law right of action.
"Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in
this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between
"slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication. The
fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the
form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending
material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or
sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. If
it is published in more durable form, for example in written words,
film, compact disc and the like, then it is considered libel.
> *Section 6: Removal
> *In addition to the criteria set forth under Article II, a board member may
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Sean Feeney
"A board that is tasked with the responsibility of running a 501(c)3 should have the competences to run a 501(c)3 and get all the help they can from as many people as they can, including outside people, to do that," Patrick said.
Several of your members had expressed concerns to me that maybe the 501(c)3 MUFON, Inc. was also having a few problems at the top, not asking for help from as many people as they could, and these members had wonderful suggestions on how to improve your organization from the bottom up. If these suggestions somehow may harm your ego or MUFON's reputation, you're reading them wrong. They're a call to action, a suggestion for betterment, not some sort of attack or intentional misdeed. Those members and I sincerely hope that MUFON improves by taking our good-natured advice and changing for the better.
You're invited to write a rebuttal and send it to this list to be published on our website. Everyone would love to hear what you have to say other than legalese and denials. Let's hear your plan for improvement.
Sincerely,
Sean Feeney
Director, The Anomaly Response Network
James Carrion
On Mar 26, 9:50 pm, "Sean Feeney" <seanfro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> True assertion #1: I already explained my use of the word "overnight" in our
> original private email. It was used in the context of explaining how your
> own membership felt by not being consulted on the matter of who was
> appointed as their new leader. I repeat from this email:
>
> "The word "overnight" may have been out of place, but it was used to
> indicate a quick transition that was not widely, publicly announced (the
> yearly symposium, with its large entry fee, was not considered public in
> this case, even though it is open to the public for this fee). Was it
> announced in the published symposium proceedings? Was there a forum (or at
> least a request for input) for MUFON membership to discuss the future of
> their organization? You are not personally attacked in the article - you are
> only mentioned as the new leader with a link to your public bio."
I never felt personally attacked. I am defending the reputation of
MUFON.
> True assertion #2: No executive meeting minutes are posted on your website,
> and there is no public calendar there listing the date of these meeting that
> you claim are open to the public.
Just because the meetings are not announced on our website does not
classify them as secret. They have been and always will be public. The
results of our business meetings are communicated to the State
Directors and their representatives at the annual symposium. If you
look at www.mufon.com/symposia.htm, you will see where the MUFON Board
meets with the State Directors on the opening day. The MUFON Journal
is also used to announce the actions taken by the Board.
> True assertion #3: As stated in your own by-laws:
>
> "ARTICLE II: MEMBERSHIP
> Membership privileges may be terminated for failure to remit annual dues
> and/or for unlawful, unethical or abusive behavior."
>
> "ARTICLE IV: CORPORATION OFFICERS
> The Corporate Officers of MUFON shall be: (1) International Director
> (President), (2) Corporate Secretary, and (3) Corporate Treasurer. The
> corporate officers, named by the Board of Directors, may succeed themselves
> for an unspecified number of terms."
>
> "ARTICLE VI: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
> *Section 6: Removal
> *In addition to the criteria set forth under Article II, a board member may
> be removed for failure to participate in three consecutive board meetings."
>
> None of your by-laws call for a method for your membership to directly
> petition for the removal of an officer
Sorry, you are not getting off that easily by quoting our bylaws. Your
original statement was made to insinuate that MUFON members have no
recourse for communicating these abuses, when in fact, MUFON members
petition me all the time to remove an ineffective State or Assistant
State director and action is taken based on that petitioning.
>
> True assertion #4: I challenge you to prove that you have resolved the UFO
> mystery in a scientific manner. What can be proven, however, is that people
> who do not pay for access to your club do not get to participate in national
> activities. As you stated in your email, "Non profits are beholden to the
> public by offering public services." I would claim that by preventing the
> impoverished from participating in your organization - and remember, many of
> the world's great scientists were indeed in this boat - you are not helping
> the public or helping to resolve the UFO mystery.
Your logic is convoluted and hard to follow. First off, we are not a
club, we are a nonprofit scientific research organization. Again you
show your ignorance of nonprofits as our duties are to the public - to
investigate UFOs (which costs the public nothing - we do not charge
for our investigations) to research UFOs (the public does not finance
this - our income dollars do) and to educate the public (which we do
through media appearances, brochures, our web site, etc.) You
challenge me to prove that we have resolved the UFO mystery in a
scientific manner? The UFO mystery has not been solved, the research
is still ongoing and MUFON plays a vital part in that. As I said in my
recent email to you, I personally financed to the tune of $4000.00 a
workshop of leading Ufologists to assess where we were at with the UFO
phenomenon.
> True assertion #5: Source is cited. Take up your beef on this one with Jerry
> Black directly. As I stated in my email:
>
> "...the fact remains that after investigating a sighting, Maccabee teamed up
> with the witness to write a book and there is money involved. This simply
> isn't credible. As a supposed scientist, Maccabee and crew should not be
> selling books and earning money - they should be publishing research papers
> in peer-reviewed journals instead. This is why, as I've been told by
> employed scientists in traditional fields multiple times, they don't take us
> seriously in this field. In accordance with MUFON's stated purpose and
> mission, MUFON should be resolving such issues."
You can't equate the action of any single MUFON member with the
organization as a whole. Your extrapolations still boil down to one
thingh - libel and slander against MUFON as an organization.
> True assertion #6: This is what I've been told is the general feeling by a
> great many people both inside and outside of your organization. I am not
> stating it as a fact - since you don't post your organization's financial
> statements online, no one can hold you accountable enough to prove this
> either way. But this fact regarding your financial statements availability
> to your membership is indeed what has caused this general sentiment and
> could readily be resolved if you heed their and my call to post the MUFON
> income and expenditure reports on your website. You cannot argue with a
> feeling, but you can change it if you just try.
You seem to have ignored the information that was sent in my email to
you. MUFON is required to file an annual tax return with the IRS that
CLEARLY states how our income dollars have been spent. Your statement
that no one can hold us accountable is false. Even though you didn't
bother to do your homework here and find this out, you still made the
claim anyway - which is by definition libel.
> True assertion #7: I challenge you to prove that the majority of MUFON's
> income is spent on field investigations, lab research and analysis.
Do you think that the MUFON CMS system (used for investigations) at
www.mufoncms.com is hosted for free? Do you think that the Pandora
Project that digitized 38 years of case files was done for free
(available for serious UFO researchers)? Do you think that MUFON's
phone system, printing of brochures, MUFON Journals, warehouse space,
etc. is all free of charge? We run on a bare bones budget to meet our
mission and goals. If the need arises for analysis we seek out labs
and scientists who are willing to donate their time and labs for no
cost and we pay for them if we can't find volunteers. This is not
cheating the membership out of their dues as your are insinuating but
simply being good stewards so that we are always financially viable.
Do you know anything about the history of organizations like NICAP and
APRO who fell by the wayside because they couldn't stay afloat
financially. Running an organization requires good stewardship and
despite your many false claims to the contrary, MUFON has survived
because it has always had strong leadership (MUFON Board) that
recognizes that.
All available funds are spent for the good of the organization and to
meet MUFON's mission and goals not as you insinuate to line our
pockets while swinding the public.
> I think we will simply have to agree to disagree on who is caught telling
> the lies here, and you really should consult council on the definitions of
> slander and libel. You actually have to prove that my commentary is false,
> and since they are regarding a general feeling or sentiment and simply
> calling a 501(c)3 to action on those feelings, you can't prove anything
> illegal took place. I was not attacking any persons or organizations. What
> you can do is stop threatening me with legal action and start working on the
> task of saving your organization from the slump it has found itself in.
You need to grow up and take responsibility for your spurious words,
not try debating using flimsy arguments and circular logic.
> Being 20 years old certainly does not give me any right to slander or libel
> which is why nothing I said was slander or libel. As a responsible and
> ethical scientist, I simply gave your organization some suggestions on how
> to improve your reputation. That you would turn this into some sort of
> personal attack does speak to my age - the mere notion that you, as the
> International Director of MUFON, would threaten legal action because I
> notified you about what your members and the public felt and offered you
> suggestions on how to fix those feelings is completely and utterly
> ridiculous. Your own actions here are what is not helping MUFON.
As I said before, you defamed the organization, not me personally. The
only real question is whether MUFON will pursue legal action against
you or not, which will be based on the advice of our legal counsel. If
I were you, I wouldn't dig the hole any deeper that it is.
> Best of luck,
> Sean Feeney
> Director, The Anomaly Response Network
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Sean Feeney
I think your membership, who are by and large not on that board and not SD's, would consider this to constitute a secret meeting. We simply have a difference of opinion on the matter.
As someone who has written Constitutions and By-laws for several organizations of his own, I can tell you that yes, you do need to have a method written into those documents for your members to do such petitioning, and a method for investigation into such claims. You say they can petition you: but what if you are the one they are complaining about? I'm not saying you are as this is a hypothetical here. Most similar organizations would have a second go-to person (usually a VP) that would investigate claims about the top person.
Why did you pay $4000 for such a workshop? I, and just about any of your State Directors, could have done the same for free. We have locations and projectors at our disposal. And, as with any conference, the travel and hotel costs would have been up to the participants. Such wasteful uses of money are exactly what your membership is upset about here.
I did not equate the actions of any single MUFON member with the organization as a whole. As I said in our private email, if MUFON no longer embraces such authors, all you have to do is say so and the public will rejoice. We will gladly post such announcements to this list and/or our website when you're ready to admit that the sale of books in such a manner is unethical.
The article and this ensuing discussion very clearly shows that I have simply been writing about what your members are feeling. That they feel this way because of your organization's practices is not libel - it is simple cause and effect. By pointing out that cause and its effect, it was hoped that you would take some positive action on the matter. Very clearly this is not the case.
If your CMS is not hosted for free or at a reduced cost, and if Pandora cost anything more than the equipment and electricity to run it, then yes, your organization is not effectively using the resources at its disposal. There are plenty of people willing to volunteer to make these happen, just as everyone who is not at the top in your organization has to volunteer (and pay to volunteer, for that matter). The costs associated with the phone system, brochures and journals could be dramatically reduced by updating to 21st century systems, which practically wouldn't cost anything to do. Such are the recommendations of your membership in order to reduce your yearly dues - why not heed their call? Warehouse space is another matter.
Obviously, if you've read posts to The Searchlight, I know my Ufology history very well. What we are seeing here is MUFON having the same thing happen to it that happened to APRO. A bloated organization that has lost sight of what is important to really resolve the mystery of UFO's, and a number of new organizations springing up to fill in the gap. Apparently this all works in 30 year cycles. This is my opinion, and the opinion of plenty of other Ufologists out there, and you're welcome to take us to court over it since it appears that you and your organization can no longer be professional enough to really respond to these claims outside of threatening defamation. I would love to know the last time a group of scientists who were really into investigating their field sued some kid over his opinion. I would venture to guess it has never happened - but you know who has sued for defamation over and over again? Frauds who were upset that their fallacies were being pointed out somewhere (see http://www.ufowatchdog.com/slapp.html). I sincerely hope that you are not preparing to stoop to their level, because I did not want to believe that this was true about your organization - which is why I offered so many suggestions for improvement over the years.
Here's a newsflash for you and everyone else out there trying to solve this mystery through financial organizations: there is no money to be made in this field. It is a volunteer field. The only breakthroughs thus far have been made by individual Ufologists spending their own time and money on their investigations, or by studies funded by government organizations. You are welcome to prove me wrong on any of these points.
In an email around 2000 I was informed by John S. (in one of his only emails to me) that a few select, top people in MUFON indeed get some kickbacks in financial form from MUFON. He almost made it sound like they were actually drawing salaries out of those dues. If this is no longer true, then perhaps you are no longer "lining your pockets" as you say, but back then you all said you were.
It is you, sir, that are "using flimsy arguments and circular logic". One day your organization says one thing, another day they say another. You're invited to set the record straight by coming up with a plan of improvement for your organization. But if you wish to further threaten me with a law suit, we will be done speaking here and you will no longer be invited on this list.
Best of wishes,
Sean Feeney
Director, The Anomaly Response Network
Please see my comments below.
On Mar 26, 9:50 pm, "Sean Feeney" < seanfro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> True assertion #1: I already explained my use of the word "overnight" in our
> original private email. It was used in the context of explaining how your
> own membership felt by not being consulted on the matter of who was
> appointed as their new leader. I repeat from this email:
>
> "The word "overnight" may have been out of place, but it was used to
> indicate a quick transition that was not widely, publicly announced (the
> yearly symposium, with its large entry fee, was not considered public in
> this case, even though it is open to the public for this fee). Was it
> announced in the published symposium proceedings? Was there a forum (or at
> least a request for input) for MUFON membership to discuss the future of
> their organization? You are not personally attacked in the article - you are
> only mentioned as the new leader with a link to your public bio."
I never felt personally attacked. I am defending the reputation of
MUFON.
> True assertion #2: No executive meeting minutes are posted on your website,
> and there is no public calendar there listing the date of these meeting that
> you claim are open to the public.
Just because the meetings are not announced on our website does not
classify them as secret. They have been and always will be public. The
results of our business meetings are communicated to the State
Directors and their representatives at the annual symposium. If you
look at www.mufon.com/symposia.htm , you will see where the MUFON Board
James Carrion
You obviously can't grasp the severity of what you have done, and
trying to convince you otherwise only leads you to make even more
grandiose pronouncements and self justifications that are deluded and
self serving. You don't serve the MUFON membership by your actions or
Ufology no matter how much you would like to believe that.
No need to respond as I will not respond in turn.
SeanF...@gmail.com
sean,
i feel that you hit the nail right on the head. by the way, i'd like
to see if you've thought of looking into this man's "threat to sue" to
see if it's legal for him to threaten such on anyone. i know in our
city it's illegal to threaten anyone with the law. it does not matter
if someone has wronged you or whether you just believe they did. i
agree with you when you say that the leadership of mufon needs to take
a look at what their members are saying and not just try to sweep it
under the carpet. i've talked with a few people who said they'd been
investigators for mufon. not only did i discover that this is a
volunteer position but that the volunteers use their own vehicles,
equipment, money for gas, etc. even so once you sign on as one, mufon
requires that you not publish anything you experience while you are
with them or from a time when you were with them. as far as they were
concerned at the time i read their material, they own any intellectual
property you may discover whether you are on an investigation for them
or not. they protect their own interests by doing so as some people
may have experiences while they're on an investigation for mufon and
then lie about it. at any rate, in order that they not be cheated,
they cheat the person who's volunteered to work for free for them. is
this fair? it is if you know this and sign off on it. not knowing is
not a defense in court either. in the end i saw their organization as
unethical and unjust. i know about some reports made to mufon which
never saw the light of day. there's two strikes against them in my
book. in the end i could not volunteer such important work to an
organization who effectively buried the most important things in this
world. they are keeping the truth from the american people. in that
respect they are no different than the federal government. this man's
threats show him to be a bully at the very least. i have no respect
at all for anyone who acts like that expecially if he's the head of
what he likes to call an organization with a very good reputation.
i've got news for him. mufon does not have a good reputation with the
common person out on the street let alone with some of their
membership in the past. there's a whole lot of evidence in mufon's
hands that they have never disclosed and probably never will. to call
themselves the preiminent ufo organization....? well, if they are
it's only in the context of being just like the federal government
when it comes to ufo's. thanks sean, for your candidness in
reporting. here's wishing that everyone will wake up and speak the
truth about mufon. as a post note, you can tell the mufon membership
who are interested, that mufon is more than willing to take their own
members to court, and they use all the money at their disposal to do
it. i'm assuming that this includes membership fees that they collect
from their members. it's a case of an organization with loads of
money versus one little guy with much much less money than they have.
the organization can keep it in litigation forever whereas the little
guy only has himself. you do the math. one of these days though
there will be a david to slay this goliath too.
---
i've no idea how to [post this to the Google Group] if you would,
please post my note to you and
use this reply with it so that people know i asked you to transfer it
for
me. thanks for your dedication to this topic and others. the world
needs
all of us to be such people. anyway, thanks again.
patty