On a lighter note, i look forward to Zebra's posts as a vocabulary refresher :shock:

Jess,

Thank you for your quick, complete and sufficient reply to my question(s). Your forthrightness and humility present in your explanation is both admirable and impressive.

Cheers and good luck in the election.

Based on the previous post, some good person has apparently managed to hack into this forum and post under Jess/Zebra's name.

Well said Counselor.

greenjersey wrote:Jess ran for VP in the original election. Jess resigned from that election, giving this statement:

"The writing is on the wall, Lorri, and I don't like what it says, nor how you
choose to read or ignore it at your whim. Since I believe it is likely that you will be the next President, and since you have made it very clear to me that the proverbial buck will not be permitted to stop with you or your choice of running mate, and since I do not relish the idea of a member being unapologetically slandered whenever he/she may raise an issue with which you or your Second-In-Command disagree, I do not believe your Board is the appropriate place for me to serve the NCNCA. We apparently have inconsistent approaches, if not values.

Jess first states that he cannot work with Lorri because of her approach, values and lack of accountability ("Buck does not stop with you").

Has Jess resolved these differences with the current president? What has changed to make working together now 'appropriate'? It cannot be Michael's departure as had Jess been elected Michael would not have been on the board. Clearly his issue was [is?] with Lorri who is now doing an outstanding job in her new role.

Green, I am less put off than my fellow Steeler fan about your rhetoric or sarcasm. It's somewhat confrontative in approach, but logical. (And that's a whole lot better than just slamming me about B.O. like that other guy did.)

I'm not exactly certain how to answer. You are forcing me to talk about negatives and the disdain I felt before, and I really didn't want to get into this. But now if I don't, your sound logic makes me appear mutable or even hyprocritical by deciding to run.

I would have preferred not to get back into why I was disappointed with Lorri. She and others have been reluctant to recognize or admit that the Michael thing was a mistake, or perhaps they've decided that the job facing them is more important than focusing on bygone problems. I suspect the latter, and I agree.

Look, Green, I was pissed off. I felt a ton of disrespect, and I just got tired of it. I was trying to volunteer to give something back to the sport, and I tried to get Mike to take the high road, but instead it started getting ugly and I got fed up with it. I have a very forgiving and patient wife and a toddler and infant at home, and the upside of service to the region didn't balance against having to fight Michael and be frustrated with the process.

When Michael resigned, my second immediate reaction (you can guess the first) was the realization that there were no other candidates than I -- no one else who was willing to step up to do the job. Notwithstanding my withdrawal from the race, I did receive quite a number of votes from teams, and a lot of e-mails from people expressing disappointment about my decision. So in order to promptly fill the gap and move forward for the region, I declared my willingness to do the job.

My candidacy is not a referendum on Michael's decision, or Lorri's former endorsement of him, or of Lorri's performance as an officer or as President. She and the new Board have been doing a very impressive job in my opinion. I have personally engaged Lorri recently on some difficult topics related to my Napa race, and I have found her responses to be very wise and presidential.

The answer to your question, Green, is that I was embroiled in it when I withdrew. I still do not agree with what occurred before with the endorsement of Michael, but it is no longer relevant. There is a job to do. As I said in reply to Ron on another thread, this Board is not Lorri's cabinet. Everyone is elected by the Teams to do their duties, and the Board will be better served by having diverse approaches and ideas.

Lorri has shown me that she is a damned good President, and it was my mistake of pique to say that I couldn't work with her. I still believe in accountability, and I will bring those values to the Board. On this occasion, misestimating the importance of the Michael thing to my ability to work constructively with Lorri appears now to have been very much my mistake.

David,

Thanks for the input. I edited my post. Your advice would have been just as effective sans sarcasm. Have a great day!

Are you actually confused and asking questions here?

When I ask somebody a question, I don't also tell the person that I'm asking that their response cannot include "x,y or z" in the same breath.

Maybe I'm misguided for thinking you should ask people questions and let them respond without guidance.

My fault, guess I've been going at this asking questions thing incorrectly for my entire life...