"HMGS-EAST Board of Directors Announcement (as promised)" Topic

The HMGS-East Board of Directors promised you an announcement on November 23, 2009. Without making excuses, the situation did not progress in the timeframe we hoped for AND due to legal matters it is unfortunately not possible for us to say more at this time.

What we CAN say is we are all working diligently to resolve the issues surrounding Historicon 2010 in conjunction with the Hcon Convention Director, Bob Giglio and his senior staff members, in order to provide a first rate convention experience to our members in 2010.

Please stay tuned for more information after the holidays.

HMGS Board of Directors

Heather Blush
Dudley Garidel
Pete Panzeri
Jim Petrie
Frank Preziosa
Michelle Preziosa
Orest Swystun

If there is a HMGS-East board, is there a HMGS-West group too?

Lets think Hangtown, CA!!!!

And Awaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy we go!!!!!

Please stay tuned for more information after the holidays.

Holidays???…
As in "Thanksgiving, Christmas, AND New Years????"

oh dear…setting the group up for more rumor-mongering, and kinda cutting the time frame a little short for folks…I think…

Y'all might want to be a little more specific as in "after the holidays"…as in…do y'all mean Tday, and Christmas?, or Tday, Christmas AND New Years???…

Heather,
Thanks for keeping us as informed as possible of the current state of things.

David

Hey Murphy, I am thinking that they mean that all important President's Day Holiday.

Brian

I guess it wasn't what people expected. Not that it would stop the schadenfreude crowd anyway …

I'm betting maybe February, maybe with an official report offered at CW in March, with a Q & A being offered as part of the membership meeting…least ways that is what the Magic 8 Ball suggests.

I have no further insight than that.

[I guess it wasn't what people expected.]

Are you serious? The safe money was always on: No announcement by the self-imposed deadline.

I can't help but wonder how the Baltimore hotels associated with the Con are going to handle cancellations 'en bloc' like this. It would be nice to know whether or not I need to cancel, and whether I'll get a full refund if I do.

Holidays???…

I'm thinking July 4th 2010.

Murphy:

Be careful what you wish for. Last time I checked, July 4, 2010 was also a "holiday." Now that lawyers are involved, you have to start thinking like one.

I'm not saying it will take the BOD that long to decide on a course of action and publish their decision to the membership. However, East and its BOD are faced with a complex situation with no easy resolution. If there were an obvious solution, they would have taken it by now. Rushing to judgment, whatever that "judgment" may be, sometimes only makes a bad situation worse. Legal disputes are akin to warfare in at least two ways: they are easier to start than to conclude and they usually take much longer to resolve than anticipated at the time hostilities commence. I'd insert some "historical" examples, but that would just interject politics and I don't want to get in trouble for that.

To Heather and the BOD: Well done, not only for keeping your members and clients informed on a timely basis, as promised, but for also knowing when not to make a decision. Battles, like legal disputes, are often "won" not by the great moves you make, but by waiting for the other side to make a mistake and then taking advantage of it.

As for the rest of us, perhaps we can spend our time doing what some of us do best: painting figures and getting ready for Cold Wars.

Well, thank you for the update Titanias. Hopefully things will resolve themselves after the holidays (the plural indicating first of the year, probably).

Oggie

rmcaras – Waiting until January is pushing it for many people if they are going to need to make changes in plans (different vacation days?, different hotels, etc.). March would be too late, IMO. I'm sure the dealers would like to know pretty soon too. If it looks like it's going to stay at the BCC, then January ain't so bad. Should we read something into that? Who knows…

Since the one nugget of information from the "announcement" was "holidays", I'm thinking January at the earliest. It's a shame the group's (hobby's?) premier convention is in such limbo for so long. Understandable, btw, if lawyers really are involved. Who knows…

As was stated, this is a "non-announcement". At least state why progress hasn't been made? How many meetings have there been? Will we see the minutes or are they all "executive session"? Are you in negotiations with the BCC/hotel(s)? Are lawyers gathering evidence/interviewing people? Is there an actual "gag order" from a judge? Are the only "issues", that need to be resolved, between Bob and the BOD? That's what it seems to imply, but I have no idea. Is Bob throwing up roadblocks? I highly doubt that, but who knows…

Can't you give us a little more?

In the time it took me to type, Hauser beat me to it, joke-wise.

As far as hotels are concerned, I made my reservations for Baltimore back in Sept. I'm sure I can cancel so I'm not worried about it--yet.

FYI, I found a hotel with a $99/night rate (plus tax) within walking distance of the BCC. It also has great food. If Baltimore is the eventual location for Historicon 2010, I will share further details on the hotel and its location with the convention staff and on TMP should others want to stay there. It may be possible to get the same rate for others attending the convention.

Between now and then, perhaps a road trip to Valley Forge is in order? It's a chance to check out the area and the AWI sites. For GMs who have never seen the convention center at VF before, it might persuade them to attend and run some games if that is where Historicon ends up.

That will teach me to go on vacation for a couple of days. What legal action?

It's Schroedinger's convention!

Be careful what you wish for. Last time I checked, July 4, 2010 was also a "holiday." Now that lawyers are involved, you have to start thinking like one.

Exactly…that's why I was asking for specifications on the term "holidays"…

Can't you give us a little more?

Unfortunately Neal…no they can't…she's already said they can't and the "why"…so like the rest of us…just take a seat and wait it out…

I applaud Heather for giving us what she could. But I hope the wait isn't too long. Based on the 'promises' made to us last Cold Wars, the dealers are probably holding off on reserving hotel rooms. We can't afford to wait too long.

I have to plan my time off a year in advance. January is too damn late. The entire summer is already gone now for vacation time off.

Back in August I was the first one at work to put in for time off to make sure I got time off for Historicon. I then made reservation at one of the hotels. Now this crap.

Screw HMGS and their entire BOD. This is no way to run a con. I may be a little ed off currently.

LOL!!!

Every time they make an announcement, it is to announce that they can say nothing. Why bother?

"It's Schroedinger's convention!"

That is freaking hilarious.

Murphy – Please quote the "why" part for me? I did have my eyes dilated today, so I may have missed it… Maybe not…

Neal, here you go…

"…AND due to legal matters it is unfortunately not possible for us to say more at this time."

In 1986 when Wally Simon and I desired to move Historicon to the Penn Harris, we presented the hotel's sales manager to the membership sitting as the board at Historicon 85. Based on his and our presentation the membership, sitting as the board, decided in favor of moving to Harrisburg. Only then did Wally and I enter into a contract with the Penn Harris, a contract which was available to any member to review.

Within the last 10 years when I advocated moving Fall In! to Timonium, the board had a meeting at the hotel at the site, toured the facility and only then after exercising its oversight okayed the agreement. It made the contract available for review by anyone and immediately began to promote the location by updating the members and providing information. None of this was done by the current board.

To the contrary, the current board which, operating in secret, presumed to move the cornerstone convention to Baltimore without exercising its fiduciary responsibility to protect the Corporation and without providing the membership any information regarding the decision either before or after, now presumes to once again operate in secret to commit HMGS to a contract to locate Historicon heaven knows where without providing the members with information regarding the site until the decision is made.

I would like to think there is some vestige of responsibility residing with the board which would lead it to publish the Baltimore contracts in the name of openness but it is most likely the board will sit on them in a vain attempt to cover-up the board's incompetence till in its incompetence it has committed HMGS to another unfavorable agreement at yet another facility.

Based on what do you now you ask for our trust?

Shame! Shame! Forever, Shame!

Bob Coggins
Founder

Holidays means Thanksgiving – not New Years! Sorry, I should have forseen some confusion – I have my eye on the turkey right now. The dates for Historicon WILL NOT CHANGE – so if you have your vacation booked already (as I do myself) you should be fine. We all pretty sick that we can't say more right now. Please hang tight – all will be made light shortly.

Heather Blush
Vice President, Communications/Outreach

Wow, I thought our local club meetings were a bit too antagonistic, and political, but this seems to take the cake…..

Legal issues, gag orders, backroom deals, overpriced desserts – someone should develop a boardgame on the subject (don't forget to wire the royalties for the idea to my offshore account).

So what convention is the second largest in our hobby? And/Or has the second largest gathering of vendors/flea markets?

We really need a good calendar for all the conventions.

Heather thank you for that clarification.

Yes, thanks for the actual information this time Heather. It is much appreciated.

Thanks Murphy. That didn't really mean much to me the first time I read it… Still doesn't say much the second time either…

Very well stated Mr Coggins !!!!

"The dates for Historicon WILL NOT CHANGE – so if you have your vacation booked already (as I do myself) you should be fine."

Thanks for the update Heather. To me that pretty much says it will still be located at the BCC. So I can go with my original plan of not attending.

"….now presumes to once again operate in secret to commit HMGS to a contract to locate Historicon heaven knows where without providing the members with information regarding the site until the decision is made.

Bob, you seem to be assuming a bit don't you think?. I mean, I haven't seen ANYTHING in Heathers statements saying what you are accusing her (and the rest of them of). I see her saying (essentially), "We're dealing with lawyers and thus because of it, we can't talk. We'll have an answer for you as soon as we can as to what's going on."

Give the new folks a chance to see if they can fix whatever has happened, before you decided to crucify them too, okay Bob?….

Coggins, please give up this campaign of finger pointing. You are NOT one that should be doing this and those that have been around for a while know better. Psst! Timonium.
J.M. as Historicalgamer, you really need to roll up your sleeves and get your own hands involved with either helping to run the organization and/or the conventions. It would go far to help you distinguish between some things that make feasible sense and pure BS.

Can we get heaven to give us a hint, since it already knows?

Top Gun Ace…isn't it called Junta?

Murph & BuddyBoy2,

Are you trying to intimidate critics? Threats are, I suppose, one way of silencing your opponents. What are you going to do, kill me? Everybody dies!

What campaign of finger pointing?

Indeed, to write that I have a campaign of finger pointing is a lie! If you read my past posts I supported Pete's and the board's Baltimore decision based on my belief the board had done its fiduciary (that's legal btw) duty. Now it is shown neither Pete nor the board did, and that includes Heather who is/was nothing more than an ignorant cypher for Pete. Am I accusing Heather, yes! But no more or less than the other board members who rubber stamped the Baltimore contracts without thought.

So, just to make it clear BuddyBoy and Murph, I am accusing Heather and those on the board who voted for the move of not exercising due diligence by reviewing the agreements. I am accusing the board of placing the Corporation in hazard for the lack of oversight. I sm accusing the board of a failure to publicly clarify and support the move by answering the legtimate questions of the members. I am accusing the board of not requiring an operational plan from the convention director.

Finally, I am accusing the board of not following the bylaws by not making public the contracts for the Baltimore Convention. All parties who signed the agreements are privy to the terms. There is only one reason to keep them secret and that is to cover-up the incompetence of the board.

Bob Coggins

I often disagree with Mr.Coggins. In this case however, his passion and fervor highlights some valid concerns that should be addressed. That said, I do believe the BoD is now working to correct issues that I believe have been several years in evolution.

@Heather- Thank you for the communications.

@Everyone- Enjoy your turkeys this holiday season.

I do believe the BoD is now working to correct issues that I believe have been several years in evolution.

I have to agree on this. As I have said before, it is easier for the gang who made the mess in the first place to clean it up. If you throw the bums out now, you may be losing some vital piece of information that they would then have no incntive to disclose.

As an aside, why is Timonuium being held up as a model? That's like praising the Navy at Pearl Harbor by saying "Hey, at least HALF of our sailors were awake when the Japs hit us!"

Sounds a bit like; "The check is in the mail."

Hopefully I'll be proven wrong.

Oh and if Patrick Duffy steps out of a shower at the end of all of this I'm gonna be ed.

The real question is: "Will he be wearing a cowboy hat or a fez to go along with his towel?"

I guess the lawyer will let him know.

I thank the BOD for all the work they are putting in to resolve a very difficult situation.

I wish them the best.

Thank Barker there's still a free press in Bongolia.

John the OFM,

I used Timonium as an example of how the process should be followed. The July before the con I was voted off the board and locked-out of the decision making.

Lincoln removed 5 generals who made a mess till he got one who did not make a mess. The Society's problem is too many McClellans and not enough Grants. So stick with the McClellans and see what you get.

There is still no reason not to publish the Baltimore contracts.

Bob Coggins

One typical legal tactic in dealing with contracts is to deny the contracts are valid. Therefore there are no contracts to show the membership. Treating pieces of paper as though they are contracts adds to their validity and therefore undermines the legal tactic.

When lawyers get involved all decision making is reduced to the following:

Before doing anything ask the lawyer.
Lawyer says don't do it.

Rinse and repeat as necessary.

I detect progress simply in the fact that the communication continues even though it had to be embarassing to set a date and then offer a public oops.

While I have no idea what if anything an attorney has advised, my experience with the legal system over the years has always been that saying nothing is superior to any possible public utterance.

If I understand the history here, and yes it is murky and yes it should at some point come out, a majority of the current board did not vote for the BCC (Heather abstained, Frank, Michelle, Orest and maybe Jim weren't on it at the time)and are trying to sort things out with a public commitment to telling the membership where things stand by the week of 11/30 (a week late but I've run a week late on projects far less touchy in my work, much less as a part time volunteer.) I don't see the sinister tendrils of a dark and evil conspiracy here, just some folks trying to sort out a mess and missing an overly ambitious deadline.

I'm willing to hang in there, eat turkey, watch football, paint a bit and presume that HMGSE will still exist if the answer comes next week.

Murph & BuddyBoy2,

Are you trying to intimidate critics? Threats are, I suppose, one way of silencing your opponents.

*Steps back and looks around for the tranquilizer gun…*
Dude…Who am I intimidating and who am I threatening?..Who am I trying to silence?…I'm disagreeing with you and saying that you seem to be going off on some tangent of secrets and conspiracies, simply because Heather said (in a nutshell), "We're dealing with lawyers, and thus for right now, we can't say anything else."
She's not saying "We aren't saying anything at all, nyah." Shes simply saying what I have learned by dealing with lawyers is "Don't talk about it outside of the lawyers office"…

What are you going to do, kill me? Everybody dies!

No Bob. If I kill you. YOU die…everyone else continues to live. I have no clue what brought this silly tirade on…

What campaign of finger pointing?

Indeed, to write that I have a campaign of finger pointing is a lie!

Ummm…I never said you were finger pointing. I merely expressed my thoughts that you seem to be assuming a bit much from Heathers statement.

If you read my past posts I supported Pete's and the board's Baltimore decision based on my belief the board had done its fiduciary (that's legal btw) duty. Now it is shown neither Pete nor the board did, and that includes Heather who is/was nothing more than an ignorant cypher for Pete. Am I accusing Heather, yes! But no more or less than the other board members who rubber stamped the Baltimore contracts without thought.

Ummm…Okay Bob…real quick question. Since we have not been told anything about what they are planning, (or what is going on that they can't talk about right now), what you are saying here sounds either like A: You have inside information, B: You are insinuating C: You are pushing rumors and vague accusations, or D: You don't have as much (or less) info as the rest of us, and you are merely "filling in the gaps" with your own opinions, arguments, ideas, etc…

So the question I am going to ask you is this…
Since you stated:

"…I supported Pete's and the board's Baltimore decision based on my belief the board had done its fiduciary (that's legal btw) duty. Now it is shown neither Pete nor the board did, and that includes Heather who is/was nothing more than an ignorant cypher for Pete.

You've made a pretty strong declarative statement there. So, to support your statement Bob, do you have ANY official, evidence (reports, copies of the contract, written statements, etc.) to support this?…Do you have any of this in your possession to back up your claims on this? If so, then please, let us know with a simple "YES" or "NO". None of this "Well no but I…"
And IF you DO have it…then please Bob, PLEASE SHOW US!…email it to me and I will put it up on my blog and let everyone know about it, and allow them to come see, and read it for themselves, and then you will be justified and vindicated…
If not…well…..I don't think I need to say anymore…

So, just to make it clear BuddyBoy and Murph, I am accusing Heather and those on the board who voted for the move of not exercising due diligence by reviewing the agreements. I am accusing the board of placing the Corporation in hazard for the lack of oversight. I sm accusing the board of a failure to publicly clarify and support the move by answering the legtimate questions of the members. I am accusing the board of not requiring an operational plan from the convention director.

Okay fair enough Bob, but two quick things…First off; I don't think that all the people that are currently on the board were on the old board and thus responsible for whatever happened, and yet it sounds like you want their heads in the basket also. Now I am wrong, please let me know, but right now, that is what it sounds like.
Secondly; Bob…I'd think about how you are accusing people of things before ALL information is coming out. Right now, I'd say that if I were Heather, and perhaps a couple more of the BOD Members, and I got a chance to see what you've written about here on this site, accusing me of, I'd be talking to a lawyer who would soon probably be talking to YOU…or at least sending you a nice envelope via courier saying "Bob Coggins?…Sign here please…"

Finally, I am accusing the board of not following the bylaws by not making public the contracts for the Baltimore Convention. All parties who signed the agreements are privy to the terms. There is only one reason to keep them secret and that is to cover-up the incompetence of the board.

Ummm..Bob…can you show me where it says in the bylaws that they have to make the contract public? I just re-read them and can't find ANYTHING in them that says that "Contracts should be made public". Maybe I am missing it. Please show me where.

Bob, you've thrown out some pretty harsh words and charges on folks…Not sure what your angle is on this, and I am not arguing with you on this "just because". Simply put, all Heather said was "We can't talk about anything right now due to legal issues.", and she asked us to wait. And from my POV, (Others Mileage May Vary), you seem to be seeing "more" into this statement…

Is waiting a few extra days so hard for you?

Lincoln removed 5 generals who made a mess till he got one who did not make a mess. The Society's problem is too many McClellans and not enough Grants. So stick with the McClellans and see what you get.

And I'm thinking Bob that the Yankee Boys who got slaughtered at Cold Harbor due to Grants idea of frontal assault were soooooooo happy that they had Grant and not McClellan.

And in other news: YouTube link

When this link first came up I started to type in that I though Murphy had sworn off getting into discussions like this. I was going to do it as a joke, but now I think he will probably remember why he had sworn off getting into discussions about the Historicon convention in the first place.