Jump to content

ASMwquestions

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ASMwquestions

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

267 profile views
  1. Committee member was just a member/treasurer but accusation was not financial so in my eyes letter should not have been shared. Only fact that ASM was no longer with troop should be shared in my opinion. Sharing more than needed is how rumors start and lives ruined.
  2. The COR shared w SM who shared w committee member...
  3. The problem is the sharing of the letter.
  4. The letter contains specific enough info. Enough so that I feel should not have been shared. The letter was private communication. The fact they were removed is not the issue at moment. It's the sharing of the letter which committee member had no need of info beyond said person was removed.
  5. @ParkMan does it matter why he did? Now what if committee member shares info and the next person shares. The accusations were not allowed to be disputed. Accused, assumed guilty, now private info that no one needs to know is out there.
  6. ASM removed due to accusations. Letter from council shared from SM to a committee member. Is this allowed? Shouldn't committee member only need to know ASM was removed? Not only can ASM not defend themself but now privacy violated.
×
×
  • Create New...