Continued from previous message.

    Yes, I hardly agree with Rosenberg's opinions, but I will not 
'punish' him for them. Richy, you're welcome to stay here in NYSkies. 

 = = = = = 

   Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 12:22:20 -0400 
   From: DSHarry2{at}aol.com
 Subject: Re: RE: eviction revoked? 

Tom: 

For God's sake, man, get a life. Go out on a date. Treat yourself to a 
nice dinner. See a movie, play or exhibit. Do something other than 
pretend people at the AAA are as inherently hostile as you and your 
associates, one of whom has made crude sexual references in online 
posts to or about women. 

Dan 

-----Original Message-----
 From: tom_c_nyc 
 To: nysky{at}yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 16:05:23 -0000
 Subject: [nyskies] RE: eviction revoked? 

 wrote: >This is the case because you are 
publicly hostile to the AAA. >You violated that agreement and must pay 
the consequences. 

Rich, the AAA has several members of its Board of Directors who are 
publicly hostile to individuals. Why is this acceptable? Aren't there 

[rest of quoted message omitted] 
 
 = = = = =

    The reaction from Harrison, an AAA Board seatholder, examplifies 
the abusive treatment allowed within the Board by insulting Clabough 
for raising the question. This is the standard of conduct which AAA 
Board members must observe? 

 = = = = =  

   Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 12:17:47 -0400 
   From: "Richard Rosenberg"  
 Subject: RE: RE: eviction revoked? 

Tom, 

I can only control my own behavior.  I certainly do not endorse 
everything that has been said by AAA members on this group.  I wish 
all of those who have made personal attacks would realize how foolish 
THEY look, instead of their target.  And yes, the AAA is negatively 
affected when this happens, and it should be brought up at a board 
meeting. 

Rich 
  _____ 

 From: nysky{at}yahoogroups.com [mailto:nysky{at}yahoogroups.com] On Behalf 
Of tom_c_nyc
 Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 12:05 PM
 To: nysky{at}yahoogroups.com
 Subject: [nyskies] RE: eviction revoked? 

 wrote: >This is the case because you are 
publicly hostile to the AAA. >You violated that agreement and must pay 
the consequences. 

Rich, the AAA has several members of its Board of Directors who are 
publicly hostile to individuals. Why is this acceptable? Aren't there 

[rest of quoted message omitted] 

 = = = = = 

    Rosenberg's rely, letter 30 August 2005, message #3, is a 
bombshell. He asserts that there are seatmates whose actions in 
NYSkies damage the club and these actions should be brought up at a 
Board meeting. 
    How? 
    Is Richy circulating the damaging material to his allies on the 
Board? Is he drumming up support for a special Board meeting (there 
was a regular meeting in mid August)? Is he agitating to make the
Board accountable to the rank-&-file members? Does he declare these
seatmates in breach of 'agreement, and ban them from his Observing
Group meetings?
    One reader pointed out a much more frightful aspect of this
Rosenberg letter. Will Rosenberg defend or protect the targets of 

 Continued in next message.

---
 þ RoseReader 2.52á P005004