Seriously Pinecam? Seriously?????

Wouldn't it be more productive and less frustrating to talk directly to her instead of using this form of communication?

No it wouldn't have been. They do not return my emails. I am telling the truth in all my communications above. If you all don't see it this way and think that it was fine for that ad to go out, and for what went down, I can't change that. I for one thought it was crazy. I personally am tired of dealing with this. And the dishonesty from all sides. The sites can decide for themselves what is right. I must see this is some completely different way than everyone else. I have been watching all this for 2 years and I think what happened was a power play. If I am wrong about the person I called out than I am. I just wanted some truth for a change. I don't want to win this battle it is a losing one either way. If Pinecam is home to TSAC then it is, I guess.

Is this what this is all about? IF it is I will try and swallow my tongue rather than express all of my thoughts.


http://www.pinecam.com/phpBB2/viewtopic ... highlight=


A couple of factoids. I am a member not an officer of TSAC. I took it upon my self to re post public TSAC announcement posts over here. That would be the announcements that are posted in the YELLOW RIBBON LOUNGE!!!


Too the best of my recollection the only activities that we publicly ask for help are cookie bakes and a cooler sewing parties.

We do not make public announcements of our "packing parties". Science Chick, I told you that in person. I also sent you a PM a while back informing you of our last PP and what to do if you wanted to help/feature here. (That was before I got my new computer and was logged in as my wife. Sorry if there was a glitch).

Freebird....you are a sweet heart but I am going to have to disagree with some of your statements above.

The statement that originated this thread was an add placed with the Conifer Chamber of Commerce. It clearly stated that Pinecam was the home of TSAC. In addition to that add.....***** **** referred to Pinecam's own TSAC while promoting the Rhubarb Festival tomorrow. The link is provided in one of these 5 pages.
It is also my understanding that ***** **** did everything she could to prevent a partnership with 285bound and TSAC.
Seems she is right at the heart of this controversy
I recall the situation with TSAC coming here very well. It was a very uncomfortable time for many here.
I don't doubt that there are many good folks associated with TSAC. As the parent of an active duty military son....I truly appreciate the good work TSAC does.
Unfortunately, your good work is tainted for many here by your very close affiliation to Pinecam.
I can understand how CG would feel betrayed given the facts of what was told to 285bound at the time of a partnership.
I want to be absolutely clear here on this next statement.

As I shared with Becky at a Conifer VFW breakfast last year, it doesn't matter to me and others whether a person supports TSAC or some other organization for sending much-appreciated comfort items, cards, and well wishes to our troops. I know many send things on their own and that is great. Our community takes care of their own and I am amazed at their generosity. I was proud of the shipment Becky organized late last year and thankful for the donations of our members to that shipment.

I am unaware of ANY donations by TSAC to that shipment. With the possible exception of mountaindollar and I am not real clear on that one. I do recall having a very difficult time securing donations from 285bound members because of the blurred line between that shipment and TSAC's involvement. I recall spending a great deal of my own money as well as a very generous donation from towermonkey to pull it off. I do know that TSAC took full credit for theirs as well as our shipment as they arrived on the same day.
I belong to several organizations that support the troops and will concentrate my efforts there where there is less BS to sift through.

I have to say that as uncomfortable as the dialogs are to have here.....I find them very enlightening when looking into the character and integrity of those involved.
Troops support is near and dear to me and I am appalled that some use it as a tool to gain leverage for their own selfish egos...(***** ****)
Freebird. You and your husband are very good people but I suspect there are some things going on behind the scenes that you may be unaware of.
If TSAC is a separate entity from Pinecam....Perhaps the add for the Chamber should be pulled and rewritten to reflect a more truthful representation and a request made of ***** to amend her post to correctly reflect the relationship TSAC has with Pinecam.

As an officer for TSAC......did you or other officers approve the usage of your non profit name in a print add for Pinecam in the Conifer Chamber of Commerce Directory?

Listen, I don't have a beef with TSAC they are an honorable service. And this will take some time to sort out. I know TSAC had to be put in a tough position with Pinecam. My issue was what I know what said to this site originally. I know the TSAC members don't want to have to worry about all this right now. I wish them the best. I hope we can wait until TSAC can talk with each other. These are all volunteers and they need some time to work on all this. Let's give TSAC some time to talk to Pinecam.

CinnamonGirl wrote:

Wouldn't it be more productive and less frustrating to talk directly to her instead of using this form of communication?

No it wouldn't have been. They do not return my emails. I am telling the truth in all my communications above. If you all don't see it this way and think that it was fine for that ad to go out, and for what went down, I can't change that. I for one thought it was crazy. I personally am tired of dealing with this. And the dishonesty from all sides. The sites can decide for themselves what is right. I must see this is some completely different way than everyone else. I have been watching all this for 2 years and I think what happened was a power play. If I am wrong about the person I called out than I am. I just wanted some truth for a change. I don't want to win this battle it is a losing one either way. If Pinecam is home to TSAC then it is, I guess.

There are other forms of communication than e-mail. She is volunteering at the festival tomorrow. You can address this with her directly and in person. Or, reach her by telephone. Those are my suggestions. I just don't think she will be posting to you in this thread, but one never can predict.

I'm confused by how you and others are interpreting "home". As I understand the origin of TSAC, years before I moved here several pc members formed this organization. It wasn't a 501C charitable corp at that time. I think they had their own subforum formed on pc to aide with communications and planning. If "home" means, the place it originated, then I don't know that it is an inaccurate statement. To be honest, that was the first thought I had when I saw that term in the other thread.

CinnamonGirl wrote: Listen, I don't have a beef with TSAC they are an honorable service. And this will take some time to sort out. I know TSAC had to be put in a tough position with Pinecam. My issue was what I know what said to this site originally. I know the TSAC members don't want to have to worry about all this right now. I wish them the best. I hope we can wait until TSAC can talk with each other. These are all volunteers and they need some time to work on all this. Let's give TSAC some time to talk to Pinecam.

I am unsure what I (a TSAC member) need to talk to pc about. What whomever wrote that ad meant by "home"? I will be talking with other TSAC members to better understand a couple of things that have me a bit frustrated (see no reason for always using pc and TSAC in communications). I'm still thinking those offended by the actions of one person should discuss it with her directly.

Becky, sorry for any confusion by the term "our members" with regard to your/285Bound's shipment to the troops last year. I was referring to our 285Bound members by that term. I don't know if anyone here on this site that is also a volunteer for TSAC made a contribution.

I read the thread back at that time but didn't understand how you determined TSAC was taking credit for your/285Bound's shipment. I wasn't aware of anything at the time.

I wasn't approached as an officer regarding any ad, but I'm thinking it was a pc ad that contained this reference. Again, I do want to talk with other TSAC members just to better understand the ad and other references. Personally, for what it is worth, I don't think of TSAC as being a pc organization. I think of it as a community charity that seeks volunteers from our area.

TPP wrote: IMHO, I think this should be in a different thread, but since it isn't.
Also IMHO, I've been saying for years that SOMEBODY has to be the at the center of everything, IMO, to serve that SOMEBODIE'S HUGE EGO. Saw it first at Bailey Days, than at pc site it's self, than at Emily's Parade, on & on & on Now this.
How dare you destory a good and honorable thing for you're own self endulgences. I'll say it now, as I have in the past, Please STOP you're influance on what makes you feel good about yourself, IT's NOT ALL ABOUT YOU, We all know that red peters, haystack, manna pro (whatever he decides to call himself today) is what he is, the village fool if you will HARMLESS, SOMEBODY does & says things that HATE & DESTORY!
After hearing what a disgrace the packages were that were being set, That SOMEBODY is the reason that my wiffie & I will not deal with TSAC at all, we just do it ourselves and I suggest that others do the same.

If you'd like a suggested list of items, give me an e-mail, and I'll gladly send ya one.

I didn't get past the second page of this thread before running into this text from TPP -- whose words I couldn't have put together better. Thanks for saying it for both of us.

Becky wrote: Just curious..... if TSAC is a non profit and ***** claims they are Pinecam's own.....Does that violate the terms of their non profit status?

Have they violated any state statutes?

Maybe -- but their problem would be an IRS issue under their 501(c)(3) status, not their state registration imho. Recipients of $$ that are deductible to the donor have to comply with certain rules. In concept I'd agree that a nonprofit isn't supposed to be "anyone's own." Being "somebody's" entity implies it is exclusively supported, and therefore controlled, by that somebody.

TPP wrote: We all know that red peters, haystack, manna pro (whatever he decides to call himself today) is what he is, the village fool if you will HARMLESS,

Thanks TPP for not lumping me in with that horrible TSAC group..Unlike them I bring joy to the world...

Now..I'm formulating a VL care package as we speak..I can't tell you what it is yet but in involves things our boys really love like Slim Jims