Jump to content

ThenNow

Members
  • Content Count

    2463
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

Everything posted by ThenNow

  1. The case can only countenance claims before it. Absolutely no other part of the story is of any concern or relevance, other than to public perception. That's the entire function of the reorganization. What are the valid debts, what are the assets and how can we clear the deck to keep this thing afloat (or not).
  2. None of what I can say makes it less of a burden for those working to maintain all that is good about Scouting. I hope it is clear from all I have written that through it all I value and acknowledge what Scouting did for me. It was very muddled and tarnished, but I have my awards and badges and sashes and so on. Many people don't understand me being "of two minds." They don't understand because they didn't live either or both side of my life. One family may have three abusers over a generation and the percentage of predators very high, per capita. With Scouts, it doesn't matter if there w
  3. I guess I glossed over those statements. Sorry. I have been through the YP materials available online. Unequivocally and without reservation, I found each module of such excellent quality I tried to find a generic version to pass on to others in custodial positions, whether individual or institutional. I know it would have helped in the past and cannot be anything but a great benefit now. It is not only educational and structural, but it gives practical markers to detect abuse of all kinds. I was very impressed. I hope that helps you feel reassured about what you are doing, coming fr
  4. I'm not inside the case, but have an opinion based on all the reading and review I've done. I see no indication in the Plan that the insurance companies had any input. It's not their "side" of the deal and are aggressively embroiled in trying to obtain additional information and challenge claims. I can't image they're ready to give up anything just yet. There could be a baseline contribution being discussed, but this is what the BSA National is putting on the table. Likewise, I don't think so at all. There is an Ad Hoc Committee of LC's that ostensibly represents all LC's. I know for
  5. Because the two creative entities exist separately, like when an artist retains rights to duplicate and use in future publications, they can be retained. For example, a lithograph of an artist-owned original or a painting you may own that the artist retains the right to duplicate. Of course, the latter diminishes the value of the original work, but it is done. I have prints of photos on which I paid a premium to ensure the artist would not further duplicate, other than in promotional and portfolio materials. Does that help? It may be the case that this is what they are proposing and is implied
  6. By that do you mean whether or not they they will have future use via existing/retained copyrights?
  7. I getchu. I was simply explaining the likely basis for McD's ability to swoop in and reclaim the 3 franchises from Mr. McDrug.
  8. Was it literally "immediately"? Many such agreements have a "moral turpitude" provision that triggers a reversion, right to terminate and/or assumption of rights. There would be an extrapolation of how it is to be interpreted, defined and applied. I'm betting this is what happened. I private contract wouldn't need to require a conviction, either. PR, brand diminishment, public perception, interference with business advantage and all that.
  9. I understand the point. I know a good deal about therapy and treatment modalities to address dual diagnoses and Complex PTSD stemming from child sexual abuse, with all the derivative circles of impact (family, and etc.). I just think you're running a rabbit trail, based solely on the point made by one survivor to the effect that $6000 won't even cover his therapy. That was used to highlight the inadequacy of the BSA's portion of a contribution to the Victims Compensation Trust. For most of us, though I don't presume to speak for 10's of thousands of men, we are not looking to specifically
  10. I have no clue what this either means or implies.
  11. Having followed the case since the outset, as you have, and after reading many of the other cases and RCC Chapter 11 files, I think Judge Silverstein will seriously consider proactively "piercing the veil" to access the LC's. This is obviously being hotly debated in the mediation. When the issues surrounding transferring assets to Protection Trusts arose with the Middle TN Council, she was not happy. From my reading, National holds a reversionary interest in LC assets upon revocation or relinquishment of Charter. If so, that is the thread upon which one tugs to show the two entities are,
  12. I'm going to predict something and it's not something I am inclined to do. This will likely energize the national effort to 'reform' statutes of limitations for child sexual abuse cases. There could not be a better platform than this offer (Plan) and the way it will almost certainly be perceived.
  13. Most anyone who has followed the case to any degree or reads this cold will see the offer as smug, insolent defiance sprinkled on top of contempt for sexual abuse survivors. Just sayin'...
  14. This a $100,000 less than my therapy bill alone. Session costs for a decent therapist have skyrocketed since 2005 or so.
  15. Yes, provided he only went to therapy a total of 48 times over the course of 26 years at a rate of $125 per session.
  16. Well, if that is true, then he has certainly come to the right forum. If it is, may I please order a heapin’ helpin’ of honest, hold the brutal?
  17. Good grief. This is absolute solid gold. I wish you had been my father, SM, coach, and so on and so forth. Pick one or several. Seriously and more so, I wish I had heard this when raising my boys. Then again, I would settle for having been in my right mind at that time. I was in and out of residential and IOP treatment, including three stints in the psyche hospital, for twelve years starting when they were 9 and 10.
  18. I've read this multiple times and cannot figure out what you meant. I get sentence one, but struggle with two and three. Leg up, please? As to two, what is it if not? And, three I simply can't decode. I even tried lemon juice and a flashlight.
  19. Many times as I've considered a response or making a point, I realize it may not help the process for you men, given your ongoing roles. As always, I offer this to add personal history and context, however anecdotal you consider it to be. Maybe my stories allow you to put a 'face' on the anonymous survivors. Years after I left Scouting, having achieved my goals and weathered the storm, my youngest brother told me about a close friend who was going through the same drug and alcohol mess I did. He was also a high achiever and suddenly fell off the cliff at pretty much the same point in hig
  20. I don’t see any such babble, but your choice to downplay what’s underlying what you grasp as inexplicable inaction. Absent the loathsome, pesky babble, we’re left with a one word reiteration: fear. Fear on several levels. If you’ve not experienced it, you will remain unable to understand unless you don your waders and enter the babbling brook.
  21. Exactly what can’t you understand? Do you mean literally or the complex psychological conundrum inherent in making dark disclosures related to the child/adult and powerless/powerful dynamic?
  22. Thanks. I do appreciate that, especially from this group.
  23. For my part, I offer two points: 1) I literally was looking at my dad and thought about telling him. I knew my dad would 'kill' my Scout Master so I said nothing. I did not want my dad to go to prison nor ruin the Troop I loved. There were 10 people in my family and we would't have survived without him, not to mention the pain it would have caused. I was 10 and never again thought of telling an adult, though it continued for 6 years; and 2) I became aware just a few years ago that other parents/adults, besides those complicit or tangentially involved none of whom had kids in Scouting
  24. 1) Allegations were leveled, shown to be factual, the judge ruled that this was a no-no, and the TCC and LC's, at least MTC as an example, reached an agreement. I don't believe the substance was disclosed. The unresolved issue, unless it was covered in the settlement agreement, is whether there is a reversionary interest held by the Debtors in the even of charter revocation or relinquishment. 2) I'm almost certain this is going on, but whether it is the sticking point, I don't know. My bet is, it's not. Just my gut feeling from all I know and have read on the docket and in press coverage.
×
×
  • Create New...