"Should Panzeri resign from the HMGS BOD?" Topic

This is exactly why nothing substantive ever gets discussed on these threads. PBN's initial post was not inflammatory, it was not personally insulting, and yet he was jumped on by a pile of people attacking him for things he did NOT say.

Suggesting that someone who presided over a debacle of the proportion this is sizing up to be resign is not exactly a nasty personal assault.

There was some arrogance in the way this was done and a lot of damage was sustained. No ill will to Mr. Panzeri and his friends and family, but suggesting he resign is not out of line by any means.

I am really taken back by this thread.

Personal opinions about Pete abound and his affects on HMGS-East has been out there since the early 1990s.

Some people need to really think about what they post about fellow gamers. Our community is not that large. We all run into each other sooner or later.

"We all run into each other sooner or later."

Too true. Are there cliques of HMGS-Easters (former officers with stacks of damning evidence, officers voted out of tenure, those who hurl electronic diatribes at each other for years) who wander through the cons pointedly ignoring each other? I never hear about any good brawls…

Oddly, Rudy and I have never met, since 1980-81, when he left a few months before I arrived.

Allen

"…a debacle of the proportion…"

See, the problem is that this has not been established in a lot of people's minds. There have certainly been hints from people who should be in a position to know, and a couple of strong indications from people who appear to have access to the pertinent facts, as well as condemnations from those who have reviewed the publicly available data and apparently drawn informed conclusions.

But until such time as more hard data is available, most aren't going to be convinced that a serious problem exists, or even that a serious *potential* problem exists, and there will be a perception of a witch-hunt and groundless accusations.

So "wait and see" is the only really sensible approach, but there will be those who wish to stir the pot, and those who are easily bothered by pot-stirring. The rest of us just pass the popcorn around.

Allen

See, the problem is that this has not been established in a lot of people's minds.

So true. There are some people that want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend there are no problems. Everyone that has been keeping up realizes there are problems – and big ones.

I really hope the current board can work all this out.

As for calling Pete out by name – I simply don't see the reason. I don't agree with allot of his recent decisions, but I simply don't see the benefit of a witch hunt.

"See, the problem is that this has not been established in a lot of people's minds."

OK, I will stipulate that people may have differing opinions as to the degree of problems. However, by any conventional measure, when an organization ousts its president and goes into a panicked frenzy trying to deal with issues or move outright an event that is already set, it meets the definition of a major problem. None of us probably know the half of it, but it is just obstinate to argue that the existence of severe problems has not been established.

"As for calling Pete out by name – I simply don't see the reason. I don't agree with allot of his recent decisions, but I simply don't see the benefit of a witch hunt."

I agree with you that there should be no "witch hunt." But again, politely suggesting (not even calling for you will note as per the initial post of the thread) that maybe someone responsible for what appears to be at least careless negligence should be removed from the position of authority. No one is saying ban anyone from convemtions or throw him out of HMGS or throw pies at him.

Anyone who accepts a position of authority must be prepared to accept valid criticisms of his or her conduct and actions in that role. If it goes to personal attacks a line is crossed and I would be against that. But suggesting it is out of bounds to discuss whether a board member should be held accountable for his actions at least so far as his continued board membership is concerned is off base.

>most *are* going to be convinced that a serious problem exists

Fixed your typo

I recommend that you review the role of the dependent clause.

Allen

that maybe someone responsible for what appears to be at least careless negligence should be removed from the position of authority.

"maybe" "someone" "appears to be" "at least…"

are NOT levels of fact I would ask anyone specific to resign for.

What is important to me is that the BOD respond and when appropriate to the situation & the interests of the society, inform the membership of the entire "story[s]".

There may be multiple issues, but I'll wait to see what they are and the explanations thereto.

And it may come to pass that there were transgressions, but, like Allen & others have said, I'll wait for as much of the whole/true story to reveal their nature and impact before judgment. And then, I will be more interested in seeing how the entire BOD responds, not just the "responsible" party[s].

There's a strong argument that all HMGS threads be moved the American Wargaming bored. Sorry, board.

I second, third, fourth and googleplex that strong argument.

At least to me, it casts a nasty shade over my Opinion of the American Wargaming Scene. Especially since it has been flatulating away on TMP as far back as I remember.

I don't believe there has ever been a thread like this about a British or European Con, but if there had I would have hated it to be done in public like this.

Pat

To bring this back on topic a bit…

First, those looking for "facts" will never find them unless this thing goes to an actual court. HMGS-East will never volunteer any actual information about this "event".

Second, Pete, IMO, should resign from the BOD, but he can't, in a tactical sense, do that. If he resigns, I would assume that he then loses any potential protection he has in this case. By remaining a member of the BOD he still maintains a degree of some potential protection. Then all that has to be determined is the fact of whether the organization is responsible or was it just Pete.

I don't believe there has ever been a thread like this about a British or European Con

There was the whole "nazi Salute" fiasco, but otherwise, no.

if you believe the email that pete posted in the official forum is true, then in my opinion, there is no reason he should resign.

Pat PLEASE!

See these ones:

TMP link

TMP link

TMP link

TMP link

and the mother of all British convention threads:

TMP link

Those in glass unions….

VR
James Mattes

OK, we have the odd winge (often unfairly) about Salute now and again, but compared to the number and vitirol of the HMGS threads it doesn't compare. But you'll note that the first three of those threads are only on the British Wargaming board… :-)

Man! I quit the Yahoo HMGS group because of this kind of immature crap.

corzin
if you believe the email that pete posted in the official forum is true, then in my opinion, there is no reason he should resign.

If you believe anybody's self serving press releases giving their versions of events for posterity then I have some real estate we should talk about. Some land in Florida. Some bridges. …

iPat

Wow, give Pete a break. He has resigned and that should be good enough. One way or the other things will work out for the best.

"If you believe anybody's self serving press releases giving their versions of events for posterity then I have some real estate we should talk about. Some land in Florida. Some bridges. …

iPat"

Bravo. Nuff said.

-A.

streetline 12 Nov 2009 6:02 a.m. PST Wrote:
OK, we have the odd winge (often unfairly) about Salute now and again, but compared to the number and vitirol of the HMGS threads it doesn't compare.

I agree BUT HERE IS WHAT HE POSTED!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar 12 Nov 2009 5:11 a.m. PST wrote:
…….I don't believe there has ever been a thread like this about a British or European Con.

To that I replayed with my posting.

example "HMGS just ran over a dog again.
answer I have never heard of a Eurocon running over a dog
Reply: See postings XYZ.

seems pretty simple to me.
VR
James Mattes

DAMMIT… die you ing thread. I only post because this is at the top and will now bump ten threads over it.

Not a guaranteed strategy.

Allen

seems pretty simple to me.

Yeah. 'spose…. :-)

Grunt1861 10 Nov 2009 11:03 p.m. PST
….
Capt. Panzeri has done quite a lot to promote and grow our little niche hobby. Like game design, author a best selling history book, organized and run several successful game conventions and has facilitated some of the best War Colleges I have had the pleasure to attend.

*NJH: This has everything to do with his contributions to our hobby, and I think you've provided a nice summary.

His military career includes earning the Combat Infantryman's Badge and Bronze Star in Iraq, and several teaching assignments as Chief of Military History at the US Army Infantry School, Tactics Chief at the Military Intelligence School, and at the US Military Academy, West Point Prep.

*NJH: These are great credentials and speak well of his professional career, but they have nothing to do with our hobby.

BTW – I voted for Maj Panzeri, and I do not regret that decision.

corzin
if you believe the email that pete posted in the official forum is true, then in my opinion, there is no reason he should resign.

If you believe anybody's self serving press releases giving their versions of events for posterity then I have some real estate we should talk about. Some land in Florida. Some bridges. …

iPat

are you trying to say you don't believe the email?

lets just say i believe the truth is between what pete said and what some of the posters have said in this thread

I may be wrong, but I would think all it would take to find out what is/has happened financially would be for a member to request that the state regulators of the state HMGS is registered in look into it. Then let the chips fall where they may.

James:
Why should anyone on TMP want to hear from you after what you did by dropping the ball on Fall In and your game scheduling duties? If you have explained yourself somewhere in the myriad of HMGS postings please provide a link or explain yourself here.

Popcorn…Peanuts…Red Hots…Cold Beer…Programs…can't keep track of the players without a program.

James:
Why should anyone on TMP want to hear from you after what you did by dropping the ball on Fall In and your game scheduling duties? If you have explained yourself somewhere in the myriad of HMGS postings please provide a link or explain yourself here.

Irregardless of what happened at Fall In, I can't see any reason for James to be banned from or publicly chastised on TMP. If the BoD or anyone has an issue with his behavior, why not talk to him one on one? Sit down over lunch and discuss it. We don't what prompted his decision but I'm sure he had his reasons.

I've disagreed with James in the past and I'm not a fan of the BCC move (just check my posts or talk with anyone who knows me).

Isn't our hobby small enough without trying to keep people out?

Topkick890 13 Nov 2009 4:32 p.m. PST
Popcorn…Peanuts…Red Hots…Cold Beer…Programs…can't keep track of the players without a program.

*NJH: Capitalism in action. Uhhmmnn, got any cashews?

THIS is unbelievable. ALLEN and i do not get along, but, i am with him and OFM here.

this reads like "some body with an axe to grind" is out for the MAJ/LTC's blood for personal reasons, pure and simple.

no i am not a member, but this is the kind of personal attacks/ HMG politics that i remember taking place in TX, and one reason why i never bothered to join up back when i was mobile and had the extra cash .

i have had only very slight email contact with the MAJ/LTC over a period of many years, but almost everyone i knew held him in universal high regard.

as for paying out huge sums of money for guest speakers, i am a not sure this is a good idea. covering travel expenses and hotel accommadations is one thing but $4,000.00 for one convention? too rich for my bank account.

i met the DUKE and DEB when they moved their gang down from OHIO to TX, to merge with HERITAGE MODELS. i have fond memories of attending some games hosted by DUKE for HERITAGE co-workers. i even attended a friend's wedding that DUKE and DEB attended. i remember he had a sales line that would make the famous west coast used car king envious, too. i lost touch over the years, after DUKE and DEB, split, never met the second MRS DUKE.
i am glad to know he is still active in the gaming community, but, very surprised at his fee.

what would HMG pay for someone like DAVID CHANDLER, DONALD FEATHERSTONE, TONY BATH, CHARLES GRANT, NIGEL DICKINSON, PETER GUILDER, etc to attend (i realize some of these folks are long dead)?

not trying to stir (BLEEP!) but curious as to the cost of bring in some one from OCS as a guest speaker?

DAWGIE, truly amazed by the poison being released over the internet . . .

>some one from OCS

??? Officer Candidate School ???

Paintbynumbers:

What is your take on tournament gaming (especially those that feature armies from different time periods, or that never met on a field of battle), and fantasy gaming at HMGSE conventions?

Just curious.

aye vojvoda, agree with your fundamenbtal point, but those threads are all ancient history, or one-offs. most of all they are early all contained on uk-Boards. this HMGS -East stuff is a hardy perrenial.

Pat

Pete Panzeri has done more for gaming in his long career than any three of the above respondents. Does anyone remember Infantrycon? That goes back a long way. He was there in the beginning when many of you were not.
Just because he may have overextended his authority doesn't give people the right to cast dispersions on his character. I like Pete and wish him well.

Hey folks, it's always possible that the BCC reps promised Pete a lot of things that they had no real intention of following up on. Pete, being (I presume) an honorable man, probably assumed that their word was good. It may have turned out otherwise. Combined with some other financial decisions that are questioned by many here, it puts him in a bad light of late. I can't let the rest of the BoD off the hook though. If they chose to not be involved or informed about negotiations with the BCC and other expenditures, they were failing in thier responsibilities also.

We are an part-time organization, that deals with full-time professionals who often do not have our best interests in mind. We need to recognize this whenever any HMGS-E official works with those people.

I hope that we'll find out exactly what happened in this case, and if we do not as individuals, I can only hope that the current and future BoD members do.

If they chose to not be involved or informed about negotiations with the BCC and other expenditures, they were failing in thier responsibilities also.

well maybe, if the boss told you he was handling things, most people would focus on their respective responsibilities. Remember, each BOD member has specific duties, and I think the culture is such that only when business is conducted at meetings do they address specific info and vote when motions are made. So, if the situation was unfolding that X or X & Z were assigned responsibility to negotiate and conclude contracts the others may not have felt compelled to review before signing. But if I were on the BOD, I'd suggest/move that no contracts be interested into with a lawyer's review AND after a BOD review.
I am not sure how the BOD was disposed to proceed, BUT IF any contract was entered into WITHOUT a lawyer's review representing HMGS interests was done, THAT was a major mistake.

Honorable gentleman or not, that is risky. Its one thing if you are the only party impacted but quite another when you putting a group's interests at risk.

I'm interested in hearing the whole story, perhaps sometime after November? And not only on this, but also the other expenditures that are being questioned.

Yes

>What is your take on tournament gaming (especially those that feature armies from different time periods, or that never met on a field of battle), and fantasy gaming
>

Fulda Gap 1976 is a military what-if. Same category as Aztecs vs Romans. A comparison of weapons systems & command control & battlefield doctrine.

Fantasy -- nobody wants to go out of town and not have the opportunity to engage in a little vice. But keep it low-key.

PBN!

OCS= Over the Choppy Seas!

SHEESH, what happened to GI speak 101???????

DAWGIE

How ya doin', Dawgie?

Inquiring minds want to know if there are costs involved for bringing over *undead* wargames personalities.

Allen

PBN Tournament guy said:

"Fulda Gap 1976 is a military what-if."

That is true, but they came close to fighting each other, especially considering they were only a couple of hundred yards away from each other at any given time, and were specificially raised to fight each other. Also, the weapons did fight each other, so there is a lot of factual material on how they matched up.

"Same category as Aztecs vs Romans. A comparison of weapons systems & command control & battlefield doctrine."

Maybe in your mind, but not, in fact. This is sheer fanatasy. They didn't even know about each other, and were half a world apart.

"Fantasy -- nobody wants to go out of town and not have the opportunity to engage in a little vice. But keep it low-key."

This explanins your justification of a Romans versus Aztecs. I get it. So how many games of fantasy (such as Romans versus Aztecs) should be allowed at any given HMGSE convention? Should the tournament games be included in that number too, as that hardly promotes the study of real military history, which is the prime goal of HMGSE?

What "promotes the study of real military history, which is the prime goal of HMGSE?"

Historygamer -- If you start a thread on this topic it might generate some interesting discussion.

Tumbleweed 14 Nov 2009 5:04 p.m. PST
….. doesn't give people the right to cast dispersions on his character.

*NJH: "Aspersions" is the word you want, not dispersions.

Jim, I'm not really sure that the 'prime goal' of East
is the 'study of military history'.

In fact, that isn't why the organization was founded.

Ed:

We can debate that, but it is in fact what is written in the charter.

"What if," based on armies of the same time period are a lot closer to history than armies centuries and worlds away. Such gaming is little more than chess on felt.

I don't play either, so I don't have to try to justify non-historical, non-military games though.

And I like the discussion right here in this thread just fine. :-)

>And I like the discussion right here in this thread just fine

Because you enjoy disrupting conversations with off topic material ???

Ed Mohrmann 15 Nov 2009 1:33 p.m. PST
Jim, I'm not really sure that the 'prime goal' of East
is the 'study of military history'.

In fact, that isn't why the organization was founded.

*NJH: I'm not sure if the founders agreed upon why they decided to found a Debating Society. I remember quite clearly why I joined. There I was in the Holiday Inn under the yellow line handing money to the guy collecting for admission. I was asked if I'd like to join HMGS, I asked how it would benefit me. He told me about all the wonderful things HMGS could, none of which would help me in the least, except one. He said that one of the issues to be addressed by HMGS was scale creep among figure makers. HMGS would work hard to establish scale standards and work to assure the makers would abide by the scales established. Hell that was worth my five bucks right there. And, the rest is history.

However, now here we are a few decades later, and I guess we can include that as another reason why HMGS was NOT founded.

PBN:

Well, the same could be said about you trying to stir up trouble. Your posts are kind of funny actually since they are so ill-informed about HMGSE, and how it operates. Maybe you should volunteer sometime and learn something about the organization.

Your one about the entire board steppind down was a real knee slapper. If you would bother to read the by laws, you just might have realized that there is an election cycle of 3 seats open, then 4. There is a reason for that. But to take up your idea, just how would you get the elections back on track so the board was never completely new to the job?

Oh, and yes, I would classify you as a fantasy gamer based on your reply about Romans and Aztecs. Perhaps you could mix orcs in with those Aztecs, as it might give them at least a fighting chance against Romans. Yet another reason ancients tournaments are not my cup of tea. Hey, what about Japanese samauri against Romans? Now there you might have something, or has that been done?