[Board] Removal of David Scott as Secretary - Response to Bradley

6 views

Skip to first unread message

David Scott

unread,

Jul 28, 2009, 5:09:41 AM7/28/09

to bo...@tldainc.org, tlda-m...@googlegroups.com, mem...@tldainc.org, pub...@tldainc.org, Karl Peters

I believe that a few highlights are in order... and points made to
Bradley's statements.
Please see inline and I have bold his statements...
Also my statements are in blue, since I have to copy and paste from the
website.
This text was taken from
http://tldainc.org/pipermail/board_tldainc.org/2009-July/000262.html

My perception of this email, is that Bradley has openling declared that
the members do not matter and nothing they have to say matter. The only
people that matter in this organization is the Board.
Now the Board makes up 5 people now, (don't get me started there), which
consist of
John Palmer - openling admitted stealing TLDA propertiey; has slander,
threaten, and lebeled members and executives
Karl Peters - had a member removed by motion to the board, without
proper by-laws to following, and then changed the by-laws to reflect
this injustice; has had a Board member removed from posting rights,
which means that Board can not vote, and this was done without a Board vote.
Bradley Thornton - openly admitted that only the Board is of power, and
has attempted to high jack the TLDA with no regard to the By-Laws
themselves.

[Board] Removal of David Scott as Secretary
Bradley D. Thornton Bradley at NorthTech.US
Sat Jul 25 14:55:46 CDT 2009

* Previous message: [Board] Removal of David Scott as Secretary
* Next message: [Board] MOTION SECOND: Re: Removal of David Scott as
Secretary
* Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
/
kpeters at tldainc.org wrote:
> As this motion relates to an office held by a sitting Board
> member and corporate officer who is currently removed from the Board
> list, I think it fair that he be informed of the effort and given fair
> chance to defend himself. To this end, i will forward the motion
> itself to him and assure that his response to it be allowed on to the
> Board list as his defense / reaction.
> The by-laws provide for those for whom a removal effort is being
> made to defend themselves.
/Karl I appreciate this, however, the TLDA has been high jaked once
again, and you should understand now why I am on strike.
As well as where is my response? Why has it not been sent through, did I
just catch you in a lie? NO, Bradley is not going to want my response to
go through, and thus, he has high jacked the Board, along with John
Palmer, you are the net to be removed.. mark my words..

NO THEY DON'T! *We're firing an employee*. It's just that simple. I have
no interest in hearing what the incompetent employee has to say.

I was never hired, to be fired implies you are making money, and since I
was never given any monetary compensation, thus I can not be fired.
This is a flat out lie. And since Gene is allowing a Board member to
declare that "employee" is being terminated, So does this mean, I can
get pay checks for the past year? Bradley I highly suggest you watch
your words, now is not a time to play a game, this statement on this
publishment will hold up in a court of law, and you know it. The only
person hired at the TLDA was you and your company to do the hosting, and
as such, I declare a conflict of interest now. Bradley, I assume you
will be high jaking the TLDA much like John Palmer did and will hold it
for your own personnel vendetta.

As far as what he does as a board member (an entirely different matter).
His intentions were made crystal clear - *He's on strike*. Subsequent to

Yep, I am, and why am I on strike? Because the Board has been given
nothing to review, if Bradley was given paper from Karl to review, then
why has the rest of the Board, (incidentally me) been given nothing?

*that, you removed his posting priviliges on the board list until such
time as he decides to do his job as a board member. That hasn't changed
either.
*Where is it in the By-Laws, that this is correct proceedings? Who made
this an official stand?*
*
*No once asked or cared what richard sexton thought when he was fired,
because it ONLY matters what the board thinks.
*This is so irrelevant it's funny.*
*
Let's not start off this way. *it's time to take out the garbage.* What
Yep, and you allowed John Palmer on the Board, someone who openly
admitted stealing from the TLDA.
Are you making the statment that me being on strike is far worse then
stealing from the TLDA. If this is the case, the TLDA still owes me $30
dollars for the filling, (I have already re-posted the filling fee
documents 3 times, I will not do it again.) I declare that Bradley's
statements in most of this email is slandering and libeling againist
myself, but not only that He has stated in this email, that the members
do not matter, only the Board matters, this is a very
you're proposing is a total waste of time! If you want to object or vote
against this incompetent employee's termination then do so.

*I personally have no interest whatsoever in what David Scott has to say
regarding this matter:
http://tldainc.org/pipermail/public_tldainc.org/2009-July/000249.html
*This is all one sided and fits John Palmer's agendy, If you transcend
into the history of my posts, you'll find that I have pointed out
numberous times the short comings of the other executives. Yet, they
where not included in this post.
That is libeling.

*Please note that the motion has been duly seconded. For the record, my
vote is "YES"*

*And my vote is NO, s I still have a voting right. That was not removed,
and if it was, then someone had better right damn now show me the ruling
by the board to remove my voting rights, just because I'm on strike
doesn't mean I don't have rights, otherwise, NONE of you have rights in
this organization.*

--
Bradley D. Thornton
Manager Network Services
NorthTech Computer
TEL: +1.949.544.1931
http://NorthTech.US