Talk:Tim Hartman/Archive 2

Pauls Questions
Did Tim Hartman recieve a 'promotion' from a board of directors that were junior in rank to him? If going on straight numeric rank then, Yes.

If Tim was promoted did that mean that they could be promoted to higher ranks as well? Yes

Is the fact that junior practitioners (that have Tim's signature on their promotions) that are on a board of directors for an organization that Tim is Director reason for scrutiny? Yes, if they all have his signatures.

Does this smack of conflict of interest? Maybe.

Since Tim's organization is a "Modern Arnis" focused group, isn't his '9th' in Modern Arnis then? Yes

If it was a 'leadership promotion' and not based on skill, why was skill mentioned in the Martial Talk announcement? Email them and ask them.

If it was skill based, why was the advantageousness of creating room for Tim to promote within his organizaiton (especially those that were topped out AND on the board of directors) mentioned? Tradition indicates you can only promote to 1 grade below yours. By raising Tim to 9th, it opens the path for future progression.

What questions of yours haven't been answered? Here is the "TIMFAQ". It's my work, and I take the blame for any errors.

Q- What was Mr. Hartmans last rank under the professor? A- Tested for 6th at July 2000 Michigan Summer camp by GM Presas. Reportedly the highest ranked test in US. Recieved Datu Title shortly thereafter This was documented on modernarnis.com by Lisa McManus. Source: Archives of ModernArnis.comhttp://datuhartman.com/bio.htmlmartialtalk.com

Q- How was he promoted to a higher rank after the Profs' death? A- He was promoted twice by the WMAA Advisory Board Promoted to 7th by WMAA Advisory Board Jan. 2003 Source: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5937  Promoted to 9th by WMAA Advisory Board June 2005 Source: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24780 All 3, but mostly the first have been discussed to death on MartialTalk. This may be a good place to start, though some of the links are broken. http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=157

Q- Who promoted Tim Hartman to 9th Degree? A- The World Modern Arnis Alliance Board of Directors. (also refered to as Advisory Board)

Q- Aren't these his juniors in the arts? A- Yes and no. The WMAA BOD is made up of leading members of the WMAA on a rotating basis. Some of these members hold rank in Modern Arnis issued by Remy Presas, some of them hold rank in other FMA systems, some hold rank in other non-FMA systems. Some hold rank under the WMAA. Some have been training longer, and some shorter.

Q- Aren't these his students? A- Yes and no. The WMAA BOD is made up of leading members of the WMAA on a rotating basis. Some of these members have trained under Datu Hartman. Some have not.

'''Q- Who did the promotion? What is their qualifications?''' A- The WMAA Board of Directors, as follows:
 * Dr. Jeffery Leader - 4th Modern Arnis (last rank on file), "Time in" Senior.
 * Chad Dulin - 5th DKI, 3rd Modern Arnis, 2nd TKD
 * Rick Manglinong - 5th Kombatan, 5th TKD, 2nd Modern Arnis (MA rank may be higher, 2nd is last on record), 20 years teaching experience.
 * Steve Scott - 2nd Modern Arnis, 5th Tae Kwon Do. 2nd Hapkido.
 * Sal Todaro - 2nd Modern Arnis, Advanced Instructor under IMAFP
 * Sources: Official organization records - WMAA/DKI/Kombatan, Google searches on individuals names, official bios on websites.

Q- What is the opinion of the other Modern Arnis organizations? A- Each Modern Arnis organization is independent of the others and operate without obligation to the others. They set their own guidelines for promotion.

Q- Don't the other FMA Masters have problems with a board consisting of an instructors students and juniors promoting him? A- As indicated above, the WMAA BOD consists of members with a wide range of experience. The overall opinion seems to range from it being a non-issue to acceptance.

'''Q- That's not an answer. Hasn't there been a great deal of controversy surrounding this promotion?''' A- No. There has been a limited amount of outcry from a few individuals on Internet message boards, often operating under anonymous handles, however no major names have come out against this promotion.

Q- Who are the FMA and Modern Arnis masters who have taken issue with this promotion? A- Unknown.

Q- How does this promotion rank in the Modern Arnis community? A- The Board wishes to emphasize the fact that Datu Hartman's Lakan Siyam rank refers to his rank within the WMAA. His rank from Prof. Presas is Lakan Anim, 6th degree black belt. The Board also wishes to reiterate that it is the position of the WMAA that all Modern Arnis Datus are equal in status. This numerical rank is within this organization, internal to the WMAA, and does not imply that Datu Hartman is ranked either above or below any other Datu with higher or lower numerical rank.

This FAQ is non-official, and based on comments here, and is not endorsed by the WMAA.

What questions have not been answered? The questions about the research and credibility of your claims concerning the number of, members of, and legitimacy of Sokeship councils and Hall of Fame organizations for starters. You brought it up, you clear it up.
 * Discussion of Soke Councils is not pertanent to this topic. Tim Hartman is not a Soke. The Acceptance of awards from Halls of Fame ws brought up. Tim, in his own words accepted them, then later realized their true worth and has stopped including them on his bios.--Bob Hubbard 21:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Some verifiable, supporting evidence that backs up your claim that having a board of juniors/lesser skill ranks promoting a senior to a higher grade is NOT a conflict of interests would be nice. I used GE as an example to support that it was COI, your turn to support that it is not.
 * Who promoted Remy to Grandmaster? Who promoted Larry Tatum to 10th? Who promoted Jeff Delaney to 10th? In fact, who promoted the majority of the current Kenpo 10ths to 10th? There weren't any other than Parker when he died. Seems that they themselves formed peer councils of respectable and experienced martial artists to oversee those promotions. Tim was promoted by a panel of his peers. Calling them his "juniors" isn't correct, based on their listed experience, and my opinion.--Bob Hubbard 21:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

On the issue of Tim and calling of bosses. This is an issue of 'leadership' IMO and needs to be clarified. Did Tim call a fellow artist's boss over internet topics that NEVER mentioned his name or his events? Did Tim offer to set up a meeting and then withdraw that claim? Did Tim try to spin his withdrawal as a response to someone trying to 'dictate terms' to him? Was that spin proven false based on posted Private message citations in MartialTalk? Did Tim claim after the incident that he did not call a certain someone's boss only to correct that statement recently with you? If not, what was your source for the version you recently corrected to state that Tim did make the call to someone's boss? Did any of Tim's conversation partners (meaning your 'he said' references of 'several') actually read the information directly or did they only go on Tim's version of the posts? Please cite any sources that will support your responses. Ex. Phone conversations with Tim (interview - citation examples for interviews can be found with a key word search: MLA, Interview), Martial talk forum thread links....what ever is 'verifiable.'


 * My recollection of this minor issue (the so called phone call) was at fault. I asked Tim specifically about it, and was corrected. Again, none of your questions are acceptable here, under this sites policies. None of this is admissible, as it is not verifiable by credible sources as required. --Bob Hubbard 21:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

''BTW Aren't you the publisher/editor/contributing writer/owner of MartialTalk Magezine?
 * Yes. And it is an unbiased, accessible by anyone publication. I believe it to be admissible.--Bob Hubbard 18:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)''

It is citable publication, granted. Admissible is more of a legal term. Whether it is unbiased is up to the interpreter. Every piece of literature will have a clear bias that can be evidenced by word choice, topics, themes,...as owner/editor/writer, you should know that there will be a bias. It is built into the goals and purposes of the publication so that it can be appealing to a target demographic. It is a private, profit making publication - much like your claims about Sokeship councils and the like. By virtue of profit motives, appeal to a target audience, and business mission statements/philosophies there is going to be a bias. --Paul14227 20:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Paul - Since the argument of "juniors" is in the air, I ask again: What is your rank/art and who promoted you? How long have you been training? Who are you, an obvious Junior to -all- of those on the WMAA Board to question the judgement of this panel of your seniors in the arts?--Bob Hubbard 21:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Ive been trying to stay out of this whole thing but..I dont buy that Mr. Hubbard. Martial Arts rank puts nobody above questioning. Renegade68


 * I think it's a fair question to ask who it is that is asking. I happen to agree with you, that rank is not a barrier to being questioned. But I also think it's fair to ask the inquisitor what his qualifications are as well.--Bob Hubbard 21:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

What is your rank? renegade68
 * Blue Belt, Arnis. No rank claimed under any other system. What's yours?--Bob Hubbard 21:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Antas Anim renegade68

Out of all of this, IMO, this is one of the only valid questions I have seen. It is also the stuff that I have a hard time understanding..

'''Q- How does this promotion rank in the Modern Arnis community? A- The Board wishes to emphasize the fact that Datu Hartman's Lakan Siyam rank refers to his rank within the WMAA. His rank from Prof. Presas is Lakan Anim, 6th degree black belt. The Board also wishes to reiterate that it is the position of the WMAA that all Modern Arnis Datus are equal in status. This numerical rank is within this organization, internal to the WMAA, and does not imply that Datu Hartman is ranked either above or below any other Datu with higher or lower numerical rank'''.

That just sounds like trying to sneak in a 9th in MA without offending anybody. The whole concept of "leadership rank" vs. "martial arts rank" is a twist I havent seen elsewhere is this pecuiliar to modern arnis? Renegade68


 * Because of the politically charged nature of Arnis (as this discussion has IMO proven), I believe it was intended to be non-offensive, and the lack of outcry indicates that no one of note has gone public in outrage.--Bob Hubbard 21:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

You may be right, but it doesnt help me understand the leadership vs. martial rank concept. Is rank issued by a "WMAA black belt" WMAA rank or is it modern arnis rank?renegade68


 * Is rank issued by Larry Tatums LTKKO, LTKKO rank, or Kenpo Rank? I think the answer in both cases is, it's what you accept it as. I see it as, a competing MA organization can either accept it, or not, as they see fit.--Bob Hubbard 21:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

That is a good point. Doesnt that concept just invite retaliatory promotions between orgs though? renegade68


 * Pretty much so. --Bob Hubbard 22:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Bob, you asked me if there were anymore questions. I asked them. WHere are the answers? Again, I don't think that 'admissible' is really the correct word choice since this isn't court. Still waiting for answers. If your not going to answer, just say so, don't hide behind the 'not valid' argument now. You've been throwing stuff out there so far, why stop now.

My rank? I didn't sign off on any promotions of seniors so I don't really see what bearing that has, but if a board of junior ranked artists can promote Tim, why can't juniors in rank discuss him? Here you go though.

My experience in martial arts is 22 years of active practice. I have below BB ranks in 2 TKD organizations (USTA and ATA) and Ryukyu Kenpo. I have spent some time studying euro fencing (2 years), Boxing/Thai Boxing (1 year/6 months), and myriad arts to minimal degrees from school visits, seminars and casual sharings.

I hold a 2nd Black and Certified as Advanced Instructor in Tracy Kenpo as well as a 3rd BB and Advanced Instructor Cert in Jerome Barber's Independent Escrima/Kenpo/Arnis Associates. So, I guess I am at least as junior as some of the WMAA board members.

Along with my 'recreational martial arts' experience, I have spent 13 years as a military serviceman/small unit leader responsible for the operational/professional readiness, welfare and fitness of my troops between USANG, USMCR, and USMC in various MOS's such as Administrative clerk, Public Affairs, Infantryman (Squad Leader), Military Policeman (Squad Leader).

Along with that, I am a licensed NYS teacher with a degree in English, ELA teacher, secondary education. So I know a thing or two about assessment, standards, testing practices, curriculum development....

Since you asked, I am laying it all out there. I have enough professional training and experience outside of recreational martial arts to evaulate curriculum, skill assessment, administrative practices, codes of conduct, promotion practices, leadership, fitness assessment....to a pedestrian level at least.

Not to mention that my martial arts instructor is a PhD and professional teacher. He instructed his certified instructors using the same methods and practices that are used to train educators in his college institution...and was dead on with the training I recieved as I was earning my teaching degree/certification.

I would still NEVER participate in signing off on a promotion to 9th as a junior ranked artist. Why? Out of respect for the administrative rank structure in place, out of respect for the ethical impression that such a promotion would leave on my senior, and out of respect for such lofty terms as 'integrity' and 'honor.'

Call on 'Kenpo does it all the time' defenses all you want, but do you really want to drag MA into the same political drama as Kenpo has been through? As my father said (and now I do too), if Johnny is jumping off the cliff do you jump too, just because?

Still waiting for some type of response to the Tim/Phone call questions. And it isn't the 'so called phone call' as if it is questionable whether it happened. It happened. Tim said it to you himself. It is the phone call.

--Paul14227 23:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

If a tree falls in a Wikipedia discussion page, does it make a sound? I think Mr Hartman is notable enough to have his page. Is there an issue over what the page says right now? I just think the whole qualifier "WMAA rank only" part is somewhat limp wristed. Say you are a 9th and be done with it if you believe you deserved it. Thats just my opinion on this matter. renegade68

Someone, I believe it was Tim Hartman himself, made the point that this whole wikipedia submission trend was for the purpose of gaining exposure for 'the art.' If that were the case, why is/was Tim the only artist with his own page first and foremost? Check the word choice and descriptions carefully and the agenda/bias will be clear to the reader. So, yes it makes a sound. The sound of self publicity. I have explained this before. The point of my counterposition is not to show that anyone else is 'as good as Tim Hartman' but to show how Tim the "image" left by rank and claims doesn't match consistently with Tim the "reality" in many cases. I'm still waiting for some responses to past issues before any article text issues are used as a side step.

Trust me, Im not looking to "side step" anything. Im just wondering if this debate has something to do with the wiki entry? Is the discussion page for discussion of the topic or discussion of the entry? Legit question I dont know. The discussion has been interesting to read, in a tabloid sort of way, but what is the point? Where does this end? renegade68

Your not the one side stepping. Bob offered to let me ask questions, I asked and am waiting for a response. I think the discussion page is really what ever people want to make of it. I read through some other entries on such figures as GW Bush and Canadian PM, Paul Martin - some of it was cerebral, but some of it was opinion and various perspectives. Not all of it was 'nice' or polite. It was sincere. Tim's page mentions 'highly respected' and 'leadership' recognition with his promotion. Some of the issues/incidents that I have discussed here such as practices that present conflict of interest and actions that could be interpretted as lacking in moral courage to address head on differences with individuals when Tim goes behind peoples' backs to talk about them instead of to them speak to the rank as well if it is demonstrative of his leadership.

It is illogical that a rank promotion is an indicator of leadership when Tim already bears the title of WMAA President. Regardless of rank, the title of Pres. is the the real leadership label. By their own words, the rank promotion was to create promotion room for WMAA members AND based on their evaluation of Tim's skill. Again, it is not logical or rational to use juniors as evaluators and promotors of a senior when skill is part of the standard. --Paul14227 04:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Paul, 4 points: 1- Phone Call - If I knew of a civil servant web surfing / fraud busting / whatever on tax payer time, I'd call his/her boss too. If Tim in fact did do that (Call someones boss concerning their actions while on the clock), then I think he was in the right, and the person deserved whatever they got. 2- The pages here - Last I looked, there are several pages for modern arnis players listed. Does the order of creation so bother you? Well, maybe you should have been contributing to the creation of pages, rather than repeatedly defacing entries with a discredited source?  3- The Promotion - You are hung up on this promotion He's promoted. Accept it or not, your choice. The other arnis players don't care about it enough to go on the record. Only you, and a couple of people from WNY seem to. You asked about promotions, if there was past precedence. I gave it. You don't like the answer. Your call.  4- The Kenpo comparison - As to the whole "Kenpo Mess", Arnis is already in the middle of its own version. Tim was promoted by a council of his peers, not a group of his students. When you have your own organization, you can run it your way. Don't like the way his is run, don't join. It's really that simple, IMHO.

My opinion, he should have gone straight to 10th when Remy died, as he was the senior active student in the states, and highest active tested blackbelt. Thats the "Bottom Line" cuz "Stone Bold" Wrote So! :D --Bob Hubbard 05:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Ren, In my mind, it's a Modern Arnis rank. Period. They tried to do politically neutral wording, and out of maybe 10,000 people who are aware of it, managed to irk a dozen or less. People can accept it, or not. Their call. If it was that big a deal, amongst the seniors in this art I'm sure they would have said something publicly. I've not known them to be shy about such things. The verifiable and credible parts are listed, in the FAQ above. This "Talk" section is usually used to work out specific areas of disagreement to find the "credible/verifiable" middle ground, not to play 400 questions and "I heard from a guy, at a place, who said while walking to his car" stuff. I've heard several interesting things about some of those individuals who are so focused on Hartman. Of course, none of that is verifiable (under the terms of this site), so, it's not been said. My only concern here, is to build up the exposure to the FMA, specifically the Modern Arnis section. If theres verifiable stuff that's negative, I've got no problem with it being included. But there isn't. I would much rather spend my time expanding the current listings, and adding more for the guys who aren't included in detail. I've contributed to 3 of the Datus pages, Jerome Barbers, and a few others. But, the bulk of -this- discussion IS Tabloid. And we all know that Tabloids aren't considered credible sources...unless you're Agent M in MIB.--Bob Hubbard 05:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Opinion. Take it or leave it. If Mr. Hartman did inded call someones employer... If you can honestly say he would have done the same thing if this person were saying something supporting Mr. Hartman then I would have nothing to say. Although I would hope he would have warned this person to stop or he would be forced to call said employer in either circumstance. If he did it out of spite that shows some character issues. I dont know that such things are necesary to put on a wiki page though. As to the "promotion". Its becoming more obvious that this whole thing is a political manuver to be the highest rank without "being the highest rank". It seems somewhat dishonest in its intent, but nonetheless existant and factual so again I dont see much that can impact his wiki page. renegade68

Bob,

Gee the tone of conversation has changed. It might be 'BEST' to go back to supporting statements with proof and citations. BTW, Cited interviews (even 'in text' citations) are 'admissible' citations in Educational institutions all the way to the PhD level and Educational publications, why wouldn't they be 'credible' here? Interviews are also 'admissible' in legal proceedings, why not here?

YOur points; 1. So, Tim can call someone's boss without direct contact to the person first. As a leader, I would think that direct contact would be the 'best' thing to do before calling behind their back. Fraud busting - prove it. Tim was never mentioned in any of the discussion, Tim's event was never mentioned in any of the discussion. If you want to link the thread to this discussion as citation so that people can judge for themselves, that would be the 'best' thing to do. It is interesting that Tim can be the moral barometer for what is acceptable for civil servants and mess with their jobs, but can't seem to accept that others will be just as proactive about issues that they disagree with concerning conficts of interest. When Tim went to the Blasdell host of the Shishir event, he was not there concerning a civil servant then.

2 - Defacing of entries. Melodramatic language. Been discussed.

3 - Past precedence...what did you give? You asked me questions about other peoples promotions but never outlined the procedures. Secondly, your confusing rank with title again. RP's 'promotion' to GM is not a 'rank' promotion. IF you would outline the actual practices instead of listing questions and vague references without detailed outlines of these people's promotition procedures, it is just an allusion.

4 - So where the board members subordinate to the President of the company or were they equal as in fellow Presidents? They were all junior in Modern Arnis to Tim, regardless of their other arts. I don't think that there were any members at at or above 6th degree in another art either. They may have been peers in that they practiced martial arts, but they were not peers in that they were junior in artistic rank and junior in seniority in the WMAA.

Again, post up any links to threads/citations about these discussions and we can let people decide for themselves.

I have explained my issue with all of this. If others choose to leave it alone, fine. I am not them.

I've written my position on this. I have supported it with legitimate business source citation and interview level citations. It is clear to me that, though Bob has used the same level of citation throughout this discussion, that he has chosen to stop talking about it, behind the guise of 'rules' when it has gotten uncomfortable. I may be only one that is posting, but there are others that are reading. Wiki is about reaching 'neutral pov' so somewhere in the middle of all of this is the 'truth' so to speak.

If you want to continue this discussion specifically about the word choice and text of the article, select something and we can go over it.


 * 1 - The individual in question, was engaged in digging up information about a guest instructor at an event of Tims. This information hunt was taking place while the event was being promoted. This questionable instructor has taught in WNY on several previous occations without incident, and had been anounced several times on that forum. The individual who's employeer was contacted was doing this while on the payroll of a small town. The 2 parties involved did communicate via private messages, with the civil servant dictating terms on who he was bringing as a witness, and how the interview would proceed, when the invitation was not for an inquisition, but a 'stop in and see whats being taught'. When the dictated terms were deemed unreasonable, the invitation was pulled. The "exposure" then continued in an attempt it could be concluded, to undermine the event. I attempted to mediate between the 2 parties, without success. I do not have specifics on what was said between the 2 parties. As to the Shishir event, the interaction between Shishir and Tim looked to be friendly. We were close to the last to leave after the event. --Bob Hubbard 18:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 2 - Yes it has. But, you choose to argue over here, rather than build the other entires while bemoaning their lack. Not logical.--Bob Hubbard 18:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 3&4 - Examples of past precedence: Huk Planas was promoted in 2002 to 10th by his colleagues and students (CKF website). Frank Trejo was reportedly promoted to 10th by his organization. Larry Tatum reportedly promoted himself to 10th when he founded his organization. Other notable kenpo instructors have been promoted by their own organizations, and panels of their peers (ranked black belts close to their current rank). (Couple discussions on kenponet and martialtalk) When Parker died, there were very few high ranks. Within a few years of his death, there were numerous 6th+ out there. My understanding is that some of these people took the bump willingly, and a few others were 'pushed' up and didn't want the bump. Again, this is my summary of various things. If I can find a specific procedure I will post it. I don't find anything not already accepted in the larger Kenpo world that would indicate wrong doing here. Tims promotion was a panel of his peers. Not his students as had previously been repeatedly made. Not 'low ranked' or 'newbie' blackbelts. But a panel of qualified, diversely experienced fellow instructors and school owners, with an average of 20+ years experience each. --Bob Hubbard 18:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

1. Citation please. Prove that 'terms were dicated' or intent to do harm to Tim's seminar. Cite your links to martial talk. I am sure that as owner/operator/administrator, you are good enough at tech magic that you can create a link that allows the thread to be observed. If not, then simply paste in the exchanges concerning the offered meeting, the 'dictated terms,' and the reply to it that included the Private Message. That would be direct evidence and get rid of all the in between interpretations. Otherwise it is 'inadmissible' because it is unsubstantiated and no better than "some guy said he was using 'best' practices over coffee."

2. I have voted and contributed on Jerome Barber's page. I have made text modifications on Modern Arnis where I saw fit. At least there, when the issue of Jerome came up, Jerome was the one to discuss himself.

3/4. Not cited or supported by any specifics. Not an outline of procedures and practices - only outcomes. Besides which, when it comes to business ethics, which is more valid 'past precedence' where internal political/rank promotions have caused separations, factionalism, and bad blood or General Electric's business ethics citation where the standards of good business are presented? The WMAA and any other for profit, private martial arts program is a business first and martial arts second on these issues. Business ethics over rule 'past precedence' IMO, because 'precedence' only means that you feel you can do it because others have done it - not whether it is sound or valid. I think the IMAF website is a good example of a set standard of mission, philosophy, and business ethics that is clearly communicated. If I am not mistaken, these folks were the ones officially named successors of Modern Arnis by Remy himself as well.

http://www.modernarnis.net/about/about.shtml

At this point Bob, we're going around the mulberry bush again, give citations that we know are there for the MT proof to support your position on Tim's phonecall or drop it.

If you have some points about the text or the article to discuss, we might as well let this drop. You are not effectively convincing me to change my perspective at all, and it appears that I am not persuading you either. Since that is the case, let us continue with text or article material discussions first and foremost. I just hope that any edits I make are not automatically considered 'vandalism' simply because of who I am.

--Paul14227 20:35, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't consider things vandalism, when they comply with the policies of this site. We will not pursuade the other, regardless of what is posted. Concerning the IMAF postings, those changed. The initial release mentioned Remys retirement, and the promotion to 5th of Delaney and Schea. It mentioned the creation of the MOTTs. It was later revised to name Schea & Delaney co-grandmasters. It was again later updated to indicate that the Motts had retired as well, leaving GM Delaney as top guy. Delaney is now a 10th. Who promoted him to 10th? You can argue that is the rank of a GM, however, the press releases only promote him to 5th, not 10th. He is also reported to have told Presas blackbelts that their ranks are not valid as HE did not test them. This information has been discussed, to death, on MartialTalk over the last 4 years. To cite all the threads would take pages. Anyone is invited to search there, and wade through the pages, links and references as they see fit and make up their own mind. As to the phone-call, those threads are in a forum visible to registered members called "The Great Debate". Anyone who wishes can login and read them. As to the argument of who were the true successors, to my knowledge, Remys will has still not been processed. I am not clear on the reasons why. Now, Lets look at a different matter. The promotion that you have so much issue with. You hold no rank in Modern Arnis under Remy Presas. You hold a 3rd in a hybrid system. Tim Hartman tested for 6th under Remy in 2001. He tested for his 6th in person, in front of a large group of his peers. He didn't send in a video tape, or do a 15 minute demo. He was promoted to 7th by the WMAA board in 2003, this promotion was endorsed by at least 2 of Remy's long time associates, including a senior Datu. It was endorced by Datu Bong Jornelas (datu #5) and Dr. Gyi (long time friend of Remys as well as GM of Bando). Tim was promoted to 9th by the WMAA BOD. Do you acknowledge Tim as a 6th, a 7th or a 9th? --Bob Hubbard 20:52, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Bob, I was referring to the format and clearly communicated information on the website of codes of conduct, mission statements, pictures of board of directors....all that stuff primarily. "He is reported to..." that is not 'admissible' by your own words, so why is it worth mentioning?
 * I was summarizing numerous threads that I've seen over the last few years. --Bob Hubbard 00:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Also the fact that RP himself appointed these people co-GM's and such is really the main point. Remy Presas' administrative abilities have been discussed to death as well. Great teacher, great artist, but not so great at dotting eyes and crossing T's. If he told IMAF folks they were co-GM's but never altered his will, that is causing problems. Time will tell.
 * How do you know if the will was altered or not? Only 3 individuals have that information, one is dead, the other 2 are Remys attorneys.--Bob Hubbard 00:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Rank/Title are two differnt things. If they are "GM"'s as appointed by RP himself...well that is legit. If the promotion from 5th to 10th was to match rank with title...that is something that I don't agree with personally either. Your a GM - as in head of organziation. The numbers game is 'past precedence' and I have covered my feelings about that.
 * But were they? Remy took sick, and vanished. Suddenly retired, and press releases were issued. Some of what was said doesn't agree with other things that were said. So, there are questions. Questions that sadly only the dead can answer.--Bob Hubbard 00:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Phone calls. The PM that you seem to avoid citing (even though that is one of your major stipulations concerning other people writing here) was BEFORE the phone call ever occured. You could always cut and paste the appropriate posts if you wanted to, I don't understand your refusal. Again, if the evidence is there to support your interpretation/position that Tim was in the right in motive and process, 'admit' the evidence that should shut me up on that. No where in the Wiki guidelines that you cited does it say that the you, as the author of a statement, can tell people to go register on your Martial Talk forum (sounds like publicity to me), but it does say to cite sources. MT "Great Debate" discussion is citable - your MT Mag citation was also 'admissible' and came from the same sources, so make the link. It's a valid source, use it.
 * You fail to understand my refusal, because you seem not to understand copyright policy. This is a complex question. Here is the simple answer. I will not post content from MartialTalk's discussion threads here as I, in doing so, I would be agreeing to release those posts into public domain. I do not agree to that. The copyright policy that this site follows, is not compatible with the copyright policy followed by most web sites, including MartialTalk. If you do not under stand that distinction, I would highly recommend you look up such specifics on your own, as that discussion is not relevant to the topic at hand.


 * As to the "Underhanded" reference, no, it is not. I informed people where to look. Registration IS required in order to see those threads as ALL non-martial art art specific sections require an active membership to view. It is not a recruitment technique, but a fact. This locking off of sections is common to many forums.


 * Here are the links:


 * Information on Dr. Gyi???
 * Where'd it go?
 * Dr. Gyi Seminar October 1st, 2005 (Possibly his Last in New York)
 * There was a 4th thread, however it was removed, at the "injured" parties request.


 * You will not be able to read them as you were banned from the site some time ago. That subject is also, not relevant here, as it is a matter between you and the banning administrator.
 * I did offer to publicly validate or vindicate the individual who's boss was called, however he refused my offer. I would be happy to pull those PMs and post them. Please have the alleged wronged party contact me directly and give me permission to do so. I can also restore the missing at his request.

Other question is this: How did Tim get the IP address in the first place? He doesn't have any administrative/admin powers according to his role as 'advisor' on MT, so it must have been through yourself or another administrative power holder on MT. Logically that is the only way.
 * Did Tim obtain the IP? Or did he note other things and make a logical assumption, as well as discuss things with this individuals coworkers? It doesn't take a genius to ask "Was so-n-so working last night? Really? When?" Then look at post time stamps. If the employeer were to send a legit request for server logs, they'll be provided. People shouldn't post from work, especially when there are policies against that, wouldn't you agree?--Bob Hubbard 00:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

My rank is not in question here. The IEKA curriculum, much like the AMAA in terms of philosophy/influence, and since Tom Bolden has already outlined AMAA in the Modern Arnis page here, I won't over explain it.

I don't understand the video, 15 minute demo comments, but I do know this: Tim is definitely ranked 6th in Modern Arnis under Remy Presas. He is definitely ranked higher than that in his own organziation. Endorsements....those are nice too. Since Dr. Gyi is on the Sokeship council AND the SC is really nothing more than 'endorsing' the thoroughness of a persons curriculum and experience AND you have said that such organizations lack integrity....do you see the connections?
 * The video/demo comments are in refference to the fact that many of these sokeship boards will issue your award based on a video presentation. The individuals mentioned are also listed as endorsing the promotion of at least 1 other MA person. If they aren't valid here, then they aren't valid there either, correct?--Bob Hubbard 00:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Can we move on to other topics if your not going to validly answer the questions I have posted and continue to divert attention to me and my rank instead? As I said, we have been around and around this. If your not going to use a valid citation, just say so and we can move on.
 * I was answering the questions, by seeking the credentials of the individual who most seems to take issue with it.--Bob Hubbard 00:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Now, other than this phone call and Tims recent promotion, is there anything else the WNYers would like to discuss?--Bob Hubbard 00:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Mr. Hubbard is in error regarding the Kenpo GM situation. There were other Systems of Kenpo in existence prior to GM Ed Parker's death and there were other Head Teachers holding the 10th degree rank. GM Ralph Castro, GM William Chun, Sr., GM John McSweeny, GM Ted Tabura, GM Al Dacascos, GM Victor Gascon, GM George Pesare & GM Adriano Emperado. Iwould also like to add that Larry Tatum was awarded his grand master certificate by the Yudanshakai Council or 10 Grand Matsters Council at the 2001 Gathering of Eagles in Las Vegas, at the awards dinner on Saturday August 11, 2001, held in the Oleans Hotel before 500+ witnesses. I was one of those people witnessing the award. Binjaram.


 * My apologies. I was refering to the EPAK branch in my comments. No slight was intended towards the gentlemen mentioned or the non-epak branches. As to Mr. Tatum, thank you for the correction. I wasn't aware of that and had been unable to disprove what I had been told. I stand corrected.--Bob Hubbard 18:11, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Bob,

I understand copyright law fairly well. If you use a direct quote, cite your source for the quote, why is that different than using a newspaper as a source as long as you say it came from the Daily whatever? MartialTalk Forum is like MartialTalk Mag, isn't it? If you can cite one, you can cite the other. Once people register and post, you as owner/administrator 'own' the words so to speak -as long as you don't try to make profit or take credit for those words, it is only citation. Besides which, 'past precedence' would show how cut/paste quotations with citations are done all the time. If 'past predecence' is defense enough in your mind for Tim's promotion, a simple quote with citation should be more than fine.

Given that the quotes would not be hearsay, third party interpretation or anything like that because it is Tim Hartman's own words and those of the other party, I don't see the problem.

The point ultimately is this: Tim said to call him. He was called. Tim then asked for details of how the meeting could be set up. The response was "your house, your rules." This phone call was AFTER THE PM I keep referring to that you can't seem to post up. THEN Tim said directly "I'll get back to you." He never did. The next phone call from Tim was to the other party's boss - not to him directly. So, Tim called behind someones back because Tim was suppose to make direct contact, by his own words. I believe that there are also some PM's asking you to confirm that his PM's to Tim - asking for some form of neutral ground - were recieved because Tim was refusing to reply via PM. So, not only were phone calls not returned, but PM's that were attempts to deal man to man were not being returned. You have all the information, so this spin of 'dictating terms,' 'refusals' and such are really for you to prove. Why?

Because the point is that the article mentions 'leadership' as one of the demonstrative reasons for the promotion. Tim called a person's boss over internet drama instead of dealing directly with the individual, that type of behavior reflects on leadership traits IMO.

My other concern about the leadership language is that Tim was willing to damage someone's career over internet drama based on ASSUMPTIONS. If he could only work from tracking post times, how does he know that they were from work and not home - midnight employees tend to keep the same hours on their days off to stay on on the same sleep schedules. Whose to say that it was not during an authorized break? There are many a military and law enforcement officer that may have posted from work, civil servant types that have posted that thread as well as others that could be considered work hour postings. I have no recollection of Tim calling their employers over such lofty values as protection of tax payer's dollars. As mentioned above, Tim had time and opportunity to follow up on his promised 'call you back' statement, reply to PM's, or simply call the person direct at any point. He made the choice not to do any of those though.

If you can disprove any of the statements here concerning the sequence/content of the inititial "your house, your rules" PM, the direct phone conversation, the promised call back, the numerous PM attempts, and/or the PM to you to confirm that the PM's to Tim were recieved, then please do so. If you can not, then you also can not 'prove' that your interpretation/spin on the whole incident is factual or valid.

As far as the Sokeship councils...I am not the one saying that endorsements are invalid. You are when you say that organziations such as Sokeship councils endorsing systems and recognizing system heads are not legit, so I don't know what bearing your comment about that has on this discussion.

Binjarim,

Thank you for the information concerning 'past prededences' of seniors that were awared rank by seniors to them or at least endorsed by true peers/seniors.

I hope that it is clear how TIm's phone call relates to the text IMO. If you would like to make clear and accessible citations of some kind that would support your interpretation, that would be welcome. Otherwise I am willing to move to another textual or article issue of you are. --Paul14227 19:45, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Paul, What part of "I refuse to relinquish those rights" and "message boards aren't acceptable references" don't you understand? The policy here is this: "Content must not violate any copyright and must be verifiable. Your contributions will be licensed under the GFDL.". MartialTalk does not operate under the GFDL.

''Again, the links could be opened up though. THey were open for guest observation before, so they could be again. You'll what you want though.''--Paul14227 22:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * They were. They aren't now. The non-art sections are all locked as such, and there are no plans to reopen them to non-members.--Bob Hubbard 23:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding that phone call, considering that a substantial number of Tims clients are either LEO or LEO families from the WNY area, don't you think he might have checked with a few of them, prior to taking such actions, so as to not jeopardise his relationships there?

''Again, what were these people going on other than Tim's version? He didn't seem to care about what impact ignoring attempts at direct contact would have.''--Paul14227 22:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * At the time of this event, that forum was readable by the public. It is not now.--Bob Hubbard 23:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Again, I will release the information if those involved agree to it's release. I have Tims permission to do so. Get me the other parties permission. You are the one who keeps pushing that matter. Not he. As to your recalling of the particulars of that phone call, what is your source? How can we verify it? As to the "destroying the reputation" bit, that is a bit melodramatic. The person in question was actively digging up dirt concerning an individual who was being brought in at expense to teach at a seminar.

'' Well, like I said, you 'own' the words since you 'own' the forum. You don't need permission to release anything. Just open the link to guest viewing.''--Paul14227 22:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No. The PM's, and verification of those IP's require the writen permission of 2 parties for public release. I have one parties permission. Since the subject of this inquiry is your student and friend, I leave obtaiing that permission to you, since you want the information. The content of the forums is available to those so inclined to follow the requirements of the site to obtain. I will not allow it to be posted here, as I do not choose to release any content on MartialTalk into the Public Domain.--Bob Hubbard 23:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

One could say this was an attempt to defame someone's reputation while disrupt the operation of a legitimate business. No such similar outcry's had happened during previous seminars at this location, by this instructor.

'' Why didn't Tim make such statements directly to the individual first? I think "intent" needs to be proven. Without it, Tim was assuming, not only where and when, but intent as well.''--Paul14227 22:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I think without verifiable proof on either side, all there is is assumptions Paul. Perhaps such things were said. I don't have a copy of the phone call. Do you?--Bob Hubbard 23:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

You have been training for 22 years. Tim has been teaching for almost 20 years. (He reached certified instructor status in Modern Arnis in 1986 I believe.) He was promoted to 6th by the founder of the system. He was promoted to 7th by a panel of his peers and endorsed by several of his seniors. He was promoted to 9th by a panel of his peers. Only a few from WNY have taken public issue with this promotion. Unless you can point me to a credible source outside WNY who in the MA or FMA communities, it would seem to be of little concern, especially when other full time school owners in WNY have no problems working with Tim Hartman. And, really, in the end, regardless of what rank is worn, itsn't it up to the individual to live up to the standards set by the martial arts community for that level, regardless of art, style or lineage?

'' This is not a comparison between Tim and I, so this line of discussion is pointless. But one point I would like to clarify: I think that some of the Kenpo GM appointment corrections are good examples of 'standards.'  Since when is there any 'standard' set forth by the 'martial arts community?'  If you can cite something that outlines a clear, legal outline of 'standards' please show it. Otherwise, martial arts schools are businesses first and should be working withing the same ethical standards already outlined with the GE link.''--Paul14227 22:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, if there is no set standard in the martial arts community, how is what was done here different? I know of 1 Modern Arnis master who was promoted by a no-rank or lower ranks. I know of numerous self-promoted, and numerous rank skips. I know that after a certain point, testing stops and it's all paper. So, with that in mind, lets look at the facts. Tim did not go outside the system for promotion. He did not simply tap himself on the shoulder and declare himself grandmaster. He was promoted twice by a panel of his peers, and endorced at least once by several of his seniors. This would appear to be similar to what has been done in other systems. Now, who has a more questionable promotion? Self-promoting to 10th, promoted by non-martial artists, promoted by a panel of peers within the same art, promoted by seniors in the same art, promoted by seniors in similar arts, or promoted by seniors in different arts? I would say those who do it themselves, and get the non-art bump, yet you do not seem to care about those individuals. Would you feel better if Tim accepted an award as a Soke in an Arnis/Balintawak blend, and jumped to 10th? Again, you still have yet to produce any valid evidence that anyone besides a few minor players in WNY care 1 way or another, yet I've presented clear evidence that major players in WNY have no problem with Tim.--Bob Hubbard 23:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

As to the soke councils validity, let me see if I understand your position. You are saying they are valid, and credible, correct? So if Dr. Maung Gyi is a soke, and they do credibility checks, then he is credible correct? So, if he is credible, why was someone trying to disrupt a seminar by him? If he is not credible, would that then invalidate his endorsement of a promotion, and possibly throw the entire promotion into question? Now, if an organization gives an award to someone, they should check the credibility first right? And if they issue an award to someone of poor character, that could throw the validity of all their awards into question, correct? Just asking.

''You would have to prove that the intent was to disrupt the event. I really think that you want to be cautious with bringing up 'character' and Dr. Gyi. That deserves its own discussion.'' --Paul14227 22:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC) --Bob Hubbard 22:04, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The timing of the "fact finding". The lack of previous concern over 4 prior years concerning Gyi. In fact, since the subject of the phone call registered at MartialTalk, there were at least -3- previous seminars featuring Dr. Gyi advertised, without "fact finding" by him. Seems the timing is suspect. You are right, the Gyi and Character discussion belongs elsewhere, however you asked some questions, which is why I asked mine in return. I think the question of credibility does fit here, as Gyi's lack of it would seem to put his credibility of endorsement as well as the credibility of any association awarding him such an honor in serious question. So, would you say that Dr. Gyi, who holds a Soke title, is a credible individual to endorse a promotion?--Bob Hubbard 23:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Tim Hartman has been doing Modern Arnis for a long time and that's something to be proud of, but I've got some questions that have not been opened up yet. How could Tim Hartman be GM Presas' highest ranked student if Doug Pierre was promoted to 8th degree by GM Presas in 2001? Didn't Hartman and the GM have a falling out that influenced his formation of the Can-Am Chapter of the IMAF? Why was Hartman not included in the IMAF Steering Committee at the time of the GMs sudden illness? It would be nice to hear from the IMAF/MoTT regarding this, but Tim's version of the issue would do fine. Isn't this exclusion what prompted him to form his WMAA? Why hasn't he sought the recognition of the seniors (IMAFP Council of Senior Masters) in the art still residing in the Philippines? I think that these questions are worth posing in the interest of clearing things up. No need to try to track my IP. I'll sign my real name. Nothing to hide here. 207.132.131.54 00:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC) Tim Kashino in Sicily.


 * According to what I believe is Guro Pierres website,(source) he lists no rank, and his title as Sifu/Guro, not Datu. In a post on MartialTalk, regarding a rank listing/family tree that Datu Worden was working on in 2002, Guro Pierre was listed as a 4th under Remy. Dr. Barber made mention of a promotion to datu just prior to Remy's passing, which was downplayed by Guro Pierre. He (Doug Pierre) is listed on at least 1 reported copy of Remy's will, however this (as any forum post) has to be verified before it's inclusive, and I provide them as reference only. This thread has s discussion of some of the points, with commentary by Datus Knüttel, Hoffman and Hartman as well as Senior Master Dan Anderson and Dr. Jerome Barber concerning who's who, the falling out, etc.. Datu Hoffman is the attorney who I believe is handling the will at this time.--Bob Hubbard 01:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

You didn't really answer the questions. Thanks for your time though. FWIW, according to the senior masters in the Philippines the "datu" title is an award for someone who has done something good for the art. It is not a rank like most in the West seem to think. I suppose you could liken it to being inducted into a hall of fame. With that in mind; it would seem that people are taking it too seriously, but it is still quite an accomplishment. 207.132.131.54 Tim Kashino


 * Paul, you asked about procedures for promotion. The WMAA does it's black belt promotions at it's camps. I've attended the Buffalo camps since 2001, and a few outside WNY as well. Testing boards were formed at these camps consisting of WMAA board members, with guest instructors also often present. I believe that Dan Carr and Jay Spiro were on those testing boards at some time. I videotaped 1 such tests in Deleware and Michigan. Those seeking promotion are put through a series of tests and demonstrations of skill, with the promotions awarded at the saturday banquet. Promotion is not guarenteed. I've seen failures. That system works well, as long as there is material in the curiculum to test on. At the higher ranks, there is no new material, therefore nothing to test on besides achievement. Some might say that growing a school, expanding an organization and increasing the number and size of a seminar schedule to be a notable achievement, worthy of promotion.--Bob Hubbard 17:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Bob,

It seems that you have no intention of making citations to clarify the 'phone call issue' so that it is here and obvious. The evidence is in your hands in the form of the posts, PM's and written exchanges. I can only conclude that if your positon was stronger or valid, you would have no problem making clear and obvious citations/quotations.

The fact is this: Tim had opportunity, time and offers to communicate directly before he called someone's boss. He made assumptions about intent and posting and the 'where' concerning the posts because he never talked directly the taht person. Considering the posts never mentioned TIm, his event, and even gave respect to Dr. Gyi's martial arts abilities, I don't see how 'timing' is the only justification for Tim's assumptions. Since there was no 'past precedence' to go on, it was assumption. If it was so clear, why wasn't a defamation or libel case filed? YOur correct, since you don't seem able to post up the citations to support your position and you have blocked access to said information to non MT members, this is going to have to be anecdotal at best.

Standards for the Martial arts community ARE clearly outlined if you can acknowledge that these organizations are private businesses that are expected to adhere to business ethics. They are also primarily learnin/ educational institutions that make profit by providing instruction. Two comparable intitutions that could be used as models:

Educational institutinos and private business. Education: No one in legitimate educational models (colleges, public schools, trade schools...) uses juniors in rank/seniority to decide on promotions of seniors based on skill. Private Business: Conflcit of interest is created when friends adn family/and subordinates decide on the promotion of associates/superiors. Terms like Nepotism, 'back scratching', and personal gain come into play when these things have occurred - especially with the recent WNY/Erie County political issues over friends and family hiring in the news, I would think that it would be clear.

Good business practices, ethics, character...whatever you want to call it is not based on what has been done in the past, it is about what is proper based on clear standards. Those standards for businesses/learning institutions are outlined if martial artists were willing to look outside of the martial arts world more often and recognize that they are businesses first and martial arts second. That is the reason for the success of such business support organzatiosn as NAPMA. THey help martial artists that may not have the education/experience in teaching, business or business administration with business plans, teaching guidelines and customer support for owners that want to succeed.

I have repeatedly asked if there is anything else to discuss and only had more reply on the same issues from you Bob, lead by example and start a new discussion topic and we can move past this. The readers can decide for themselves based on what has been written here already. If the topic is so beneath Tim to discuss himself and Tim is your organizational leader, I would think that treating the topic as 'beneath you' would be a good compliment to your President. Let us both move in more positive directions in discussing Modern Arnis/FMA's here on Wikipedia.

--Paul14227 18:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)


 * No Paul, without your friends permission I will not make public the private correspondence between him and I, or him and Tim. You are asking me to violate their privacy. You are asking me to invalidate my rights to copyright and you are asking me to change the policy of a website to suit your wishes. I will do none of these things. You may conclude what you wish. My conclusions on this matter have been well stated, repeatedly. That the matter of this phone call was between 2 parties, neither of which were you. That your continued harping of these matters is in actuality, little more that sour grapes from a small, disgruntled group of WNYers, and not a representation of the opinions of the larger Modern Arnis and Martial Arts community. Since it is you, not I that has problems with Tim Hartman, it seems it would be up to you to find the new topic. You asked me repeatedly about the sokeship comments. When I asked you questions about them, you sidestepped them. You asked questions and I answered. I asked questions, and you sidestepped. Let me ask you another question: If there was no foul done with your friend posting to web forums from work, why would he feel the need to have publicly announced that he was "posting from home". Could it be that he was in fact violating a work place policy and was called on it? I know that the Buffalo, West Seneca and Cheektowaga police all have policies in place against such activities. I know that there are easily a dozen Cheektowaga and West Seneca cops (or their families) that train at Tims school. I also have 3 Buffalo cops in my family. Now, since you would wish to have this matter seen as "friend makes posts, evil man calls boss and gets him in trouble", I feel I must take exception to yet another overly simplistic viewpoint. Lets follow this along, shall we? Your friend makes posts on a message board. Posts that are negative towards the instructor of an upcoming event being sponsored by an individual that a group of WNYers have had a long running series of "differences" with. This series of posts in fact began with the event announcement and not as a separate thread. After numerous exchanges, the 2 parties in question communicate. It doesn't go well. Peers of the poster are consulted to determine if the posters conduct is wrong. The response is unanimous in that he, the poster, was in the wrong. A supervisor is contacted. Individual is disciplined. I know that in most employment cases, breaks and lunches are logged. I've seen enough cop shows to know that that's probably a common policy, even for a desk job. It wouldn't be very hard to print out a copy of a thread, with time stamps intact, and pass that along and say "Was this done on company time, and is this the behavior you want your people doing?" Again, I'll post IPs, private messages, emails and restore the missing 4th thread. All I need is the party you claim is wronged here's permission. But, it won't be, because it will prove your entire argument false.  You got your answers, you don't like them, you don't like Hartman and your only intent here is to paint him in a bad light. Your posts elsewhere where there are no policies concerning credibility are proof that you have issues, with him. Now, I'd like to move on. You're the one who want to know everything, so, did we miss anything, or do you have any more axes to grind? Otherwise, I think we are done.--Bob Hubbard 19:20, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

No need to go through the hassle Bob. I have a copy of my writing saved...

'''When, where and under what conditions would you like to do this? I have no "personal" issue with Mr. Gyi and have no interest in embarrassing or showing him disrespect in a public place. If he is aware that he is going to be questioned and is willing to answer those questions I will be there. I do not want to ambush the man at your seminar. My only interest in this matter is the military issue. Having served myself, having a close friend in Iraq right now and having stood at the grave of a soldier whom I respected and knew fairly well these issues trouble me.

'''Be aware I will do such things as bringing a witness, I will be asking Mr. Gyi if he is willing to show me any personal photo identification, ask if he minds if our conversation is recorded and I will be taking notes.

'''Due to my schedule of working at night and sleeping most of the day. If you insist on phone contact it will probably be easier if you call me. My cell # is (716) 818-XXXX. The best times to call are between 4-10 PM or if you are a night owl 1230-7 AM.

The "I will" part probably should have been "I would like to" I concede, but thats what the direct contact should have addressed.

Bear in mind that this was prior to a direct phone conversation where no mention of any "offensive conditions" were mentioned or discussed. If you guys want to continue to hash this whole mess out be my guest, I wont be visiting anymore. As to any other "personal" details..none of you know what I am truly authorized or unauthorized to do regarding the wheres, whens and hows of this issue. Besides the topic being embarrassing to discuss, it was really not a big deal (hate to disappoint). A couple of questions and a request was the extent of it. But the result isnt really the issue as much as the intent....camouflage it as you wish, it was about "payback", and not working out differences. In the end my only "issue" was the lack of forthrightness involved. Any questions or requests to let the thread rest for a while before the event would have been seriously considered. There were plenty of opportunities to discuss all issues. As a matter of fact I requested that the offending thread be removed approx. a week before the seminar did I not? I also made various attempts to mend some fences that were ignored or rebuked. Well thats it...you all have fun. T. Gerace

Thanks for clearing things up Tom. I think the 'intent' and 'dictating terms' issues have been clarified pretty well. Again, it seems that the only thing that these 'consultant's had to go on was Tim's interpretations and assumptions concerning the posts - Even after the above PM's, phone conversations of the same tone, and repeated attempts to deal directly were made by Tom. Seems that my source as been cited and is in concurrence with the information I have presented with documented text.

Please remember that my intent with all of this was to discuss an alternate perspective on the ethicalness of the promotion based on conflict of interest standards established by law and good business practices (GE was cited as an example.) If this is 'past precedence' in martial arts, that does not make it good precedence according to business guidelines. I also addressed the issue of leadership in light of such phone call actions to Tom's boss and approaching seminar hosts to bad mouth others before the event even occurred.

As I have said, my issues with this stand on record here. I may be the one posting at this discussion, but the viewing audience is far larger than you may realize.

It is clear that discussions that differ with the text/article will go no where, so at this point none of the other points or phrases/word choices are worth bringing up. I'm done for now. --Paul14227 14:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)