USFA Election 2008 Debate Question #2: Qualification Concerns about Candidates

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Seeing as how I've asked the question twice without an answer, and under the suggestion of multiple members of f.net I've decided to make this a new thread. It's about any concerns/questions regarding the qualifications of the USFFC or NomCom candidates. The specific question I have is this:

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC

]I would say my largest concern of the USFFC slate is Ms. Pestotnik. Cash flow seems to be the most necessary issue for the upcoming group of officers to address, so the qualifications of the Treasurer candidates should be scrutinized. Managing the finances of a fencing club and a 50 person business strikes me as very low watermark of experience for somebody who endeavors to control and guide the finances of a national governing body.

Mr. Dilworth has experience managing finances on a national and global scale, and both an MBA and BS in Economics. What sort of degree does Ms. Pestotnik have? Does she have any advanced financial education? It's not that I have anything against the FFC slate or Ms. Pestotnik, the reasons I'm so concerned is that Mr. Dilworth seems so much more qualified for the position that should be held in the highest regard in this upcoming election.

[whtouche]

I would also like to echo the desire to see this question answered.

[JEC]

Although it is important to make distinctions between the slates, keep in mind that we are electing individuals for each of these offices. A balanced government has served us well for many years. Too much balance leads to gridlock but intermittent oscillations in the balance of power have help the country. I think the same is applicable for USFA as a society.

[epeemike81]

Still waiting for a response to this important and very legitimate concern...

-m

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by epeemike81

Still waiting for a response to this important and very legitimate concern...

-m

Got Petulance?

[oso97]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

Got Petulance?

Pot, let me introduce you to Kettle

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by oso97

Pot, let me introduce you to Kettle

quoth the skillet.

-m

[oso97]

Originally Posted by epeemike81

quoth the skillet.

-m

Touché, my good fellow! A hit, a very palpable hit!

[epeeforlife]

Maybe you two should get a room

[epeemike81]

What are Soren Thompson's qualifications to be a VP of the organization?

-m

[T]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

Seeing as how I've asked the question twice without an answer, and under the suggestion of multiple members of f.net I've decided to make this a new thread. It's about any concerns/questions regarding the qualifications of the USFFC or NomCom candidates. The specific question I have is this:

Originally Posted by whtouche

I would also like to echo the desire to see this question answered.

Originally Posted by epeemike81

Still waiting for a response to this important and very legitimate concern...

-m

I'm glad you Massachusettes guys are all on the same war path. Enquiring minds want to know??

I am not going to participate in a thread that bashes candidates. If there is a candidate that you don't support, then I encourage you not to vote for them. Everyone else can make up their own opinions. Certainly you 3 guys already have your minds made up.

I agree, candidate qualifications are a good topic but this forum doesn't exactly offer the prospects of an objective look at it. So I will not answer your question. When my experience with athletic programs and successes seriously challenged one of the NC slate's candidates and a question is asked of you to make a statement or comparison in that regard, nothing was offered.

I will make a generic statement about the issue. In my opinion, the USFA needs to adopt an organizational structure that relies considerably less on committees and considerably more on professional staff. This cannot be highlighted anymore than the examples in the Debate Question #1 thread and w.epee/HPC issue or the issue about finances.

The USFA needs a professional CFO to handle the finances of the organization - not an MBA volunteer treasurer to do it. I point to our current treasurer - he has an MBA and our finances still got into trouble. So, while this is a potential good quality for a treasurer, the presence of it does not ensure that the finances will get any better. Again, I am not diss'ing Greg - it's the system that needs diss'ing. It would be challenging to find another $4million organization that predominantly relies on a committee to run their finances. And if you happen to find one, their finances would probably look a lot like ours. So, I would like to hire Greg as the CFO - he would probably do a high quality job. But I want him 100% on the job -- not his leftover time (I'm making the assumption that Greg is not going to quit his day job to become a volunteer treasurer).

[dekko]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

Seeing as how I've asked the question twice without an answer, and under the suggestion of multiple members of f.net I've decided to make this a new thread. It's about any concerns/questions regarding the qualifications of the USFFC or NomCom candidates. The specific question I have is this:

I guess as a side question to this, how important are the financial abilities of a treasurer when, it seems, a professional full time 'treasurer' will be hired to handle many financial concerns?

As for the resume of Pestonik, the USFA, as employees go, really isn't very big it's the customer base that is huge. Her time with the 50 employee company may be legit for size comparison the only real difference, potentially, is the customer base she normally deals with and the overall amount of money that passes through the account(s) of the entity she referenced.

Just to be clear, I am not advocating either candidate merely pointing out a couple of points that may need to be considered that haven't been brought up.

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by T

I'm glad you Massachusettes guys are all on the same war path. Enquiring minds want to know??

I am not going to participate in a thread that bashes candidates. If there is a candidate that you don't support, then I encourage you not to vote for them. Everyone else can make up their own opinions. Certainly you 3 guys already have your minds made up.

We're not looking for you to bash candidates, simply state their qualifications! If you feel you cannot do so without effectively "bashing" them, then maybe they're not qualified candidates...

As for already having my mind made up, I'm always open to new information and arguments and am sometimes swayed by them. I will admit that I'm not often swayed by them, which stems from the fact that I'm typically quite well informed and thus my opinions are not arrived at lightly. That makes it tough to change my mind, but it has been known to happen.

I agree, candidate qualifications are a good topic but this forum doesn't exactly offer the prospects of an objective look at it. So I will not answer your question.

I don't know how you expect others to have confidence in the qualifications of your hand-picked candidates when you so clearly don't.

The USFA needs a professional CFO to handle the finances of the organization - not an MBA volunteer treasurer to do it. I point to our current treasurer - he has an MBA and our finances still got into trouble. So, while this is a potential good quality for a treasurer, the presence of it does not ensure that the finances will get any better. Again, I am not diss'ing Greg - it's the system that needs diss'ing. It would be challenging to find another $4million organization that predominantly relies on a committee to run their finances. And if you happen to find one, their finances would probably look a lot like ours. So, I would like to hire Greg as the CFO - he would probably do a high quality job. But I want him 100% on the job -- not his leftover time (I'm making the assumption that Greg is not going to quit his day job to become a volunteer treasurer).

How do you intend to pay this additional high 6 figure salary?

-m

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by T

I am not going to participate in a thread that bashes candidates. If there is a candidate that you don't support, then I encourage you not to vote for them. Everyone else can make up their own opinions. Certainly you 3 guys already have your minds made up.

I agree, candidate qualifications are a good topic but this forum doesn't exactly offer the prospects of an objective look at it. So I will not answer your question. When my experience with athletic programs and successes seriously challenged one of the NC slate's candidates and a question is asked of you to make a statement or comparison in that regard, nothing was offered.

I will make a generic statement about the issue. In my opinion, the USFA needs to adopt an organizational structure that relies considerably less on committees and considerably more on professional staff. This cannot be highlighted anymore than the examples in the Debate Question #1 thread and w.epee/HPC issue or the issue about finances.

So you'll answer any other questions but not this one? I think I've been waiting pretty long to an answer to the question, this is in fact the third time I posted it.

The reason I didn't make a comparison is that WE is not an issue for me. I know it's an issue that needs to be addressed and both plans seem feasible. Other than that I honestly just don't care. That's why I asked you a question about the finances--because it's an issue I do care about.

Honestly T, you're the candidate/leader of your coalition. I don't see why you continue to say that I have to answer a +/- response to your two WE plans, it just doesn't make any sense.

[tchwojko]

Originally Posted by T

I'm glad you Massachusettes guys are all on the same war path. Enquiring minds want to know??

I am not going to participate in a thread that bashes candidates. If there is a candidate that you don't support, then I encourage you not to vote for them. Everyone else can make up their own opinions. Certainly you 3 guys already have your minds made up.

There are a lot of others who read this message board beside those "3 guys" who have not made their minds up. (Well, maybe not, but I know there's at least one...)

If you weren't interested in a debate, even if you believe the questions have an agenda behind them, then I'm not sure what you were expecting in the election.

It was a reasonable question, stated politely. You chose to interpret it as a personal attack. As a president of a large organization, you would see a lot of reasonable and unreasonable questions, stated politely and rudely, which are sometimes personal and sometimes not, with larger consequences to the answers. I wonder how you will deal with that stress?

So far I find your tone more informative than your answer.

I really would like all the candidates to answer the tough questions and see how they respond to that pressure, because it's only going to get harder...

[ivlobane]

There has been a lot of word-twisting and negativity on this forum. If you need to check the qualification of the candidates, please go to http://usfencersforchange.com/candidates/

As to the six figure salary, Mike Massik had one.