Steadfast is GLAD to see Richard Perry!

[SDG]

Originally Posted by rrford

Belive it or not I do know why he attended. I know the concerns he had as we spoke a few days prior to the meeting. I agreed with his concerns then and I still agree with them now. That being said, those guys still had a right to hold a meeting and to discuss what they did. And it did indeed cover much more than the television issue.

It sure did cover much more ...

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

So it wasn't as balanced as Stead said it was??

Cmon ... I know what went down there ... A WITCH HUNT.

By a blanced approach I simply meant the opportunity to hear all sides of an issue.

And it was nowhere near a witchunt. I was there. You were not. Second hand retellings will never replace actual attendance. To say it was a withchunt is a mischaracterization at best and a lie at worst.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

It sure did cover much more ...

So?

Originally Posted by rrford

SInce when does that make any difference whatsoever? Who said they had to be happy with every meeting someone has? I don't remember the men who hosted the meeting asking for organizational endorsement.

I gotta be honest with ya. I think the organization should have been having those kinds of meetings years ago. It would need to have a more balanced approach, IMO. But we have long needed a venue to discuss issues without rhetoric or attitudes.

Wholehearted agreement on this post (and I don't mean the individual 'wholehearted' but a state of persuasion).

I absolutely DO think these kinds of meetings would serve several purposes if officials would attend and hear voices from the front lines.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by rrford

By a blanced approach I simply meant the opportunity to hear all sides of an issue.

And it was nowhere near a witchunt. I was there. You were not. Second hand retellings will never replace actual attendance. To say it was a withchunt is a mischaracterization at best and a lie at worst.

tsk, tsk, Those words Bro.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Did they hand out sign up sheets for AFF?

LOL! By prophetic utterance only, as AFF did not exist yet.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

Not so sure about your facts there, Daniel... I saw some officials there!

Who cares who attended ... Stead ....

Let's just call a spade a spade.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

tsk, tsk, Those words Bro.

Come on now. How is that any worse that what others receive at time to some of their posts? Are you going to agree with him that it was a WITCHHUNT? How about correcting him for using such a term consideruing what it implies?

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

Wholehearted agreement on this post (and I don't mean the individual 'wholehearted' but a state of persuasion).

I absolutely DO think these kinds of meetings would serve several purposes if officials would attend and hear voices from the front lines.

And if a group organized with the expressed intent of subverting or changing the AOF? How would you speak about that sort of meeting? Would that type of free expression be allowable?

[SDG]

IS there going to be another MEETING prior to GC '07???