VUSN Watch

There is hope out there (just not with vusn)

2006-03-04T12:47:00.000-08:00

Salty has been rather busy and having a good time of it :-)!

There hasn't been much to put here since vusn management is still cowering in their lairs and patting each other on the back and pretending they are great managers with a great organization and wholly ignoring the problems that exist and continue to exist despite their best efforts to pretend otherwise.

I gave some brief thought to creating a real virtual naval organization and did some looking around the net. No need to do so, one already exists. It appears that they took a look at all the shortcomings and problems with vusn and then turned around and did it right.

One thing I had been pushing for, for a long time, was to have vusn implement a JAG office for situations just like the one that spawned this site.

Vusn management would simply not consider the issue since it would make for a real method to address grievances and would take away the power to abuse the masses that they seem so thoroughly wedded to.

Vusn management will go to ANY length to avoid any "bad PR" rather than admitting that losers do get to positions of power and will abuse it with all the associated messes that they just continue to do their best to ignore.

Vusn management keeps the problems going. People frequently leave it with a VERY bad taste about vusn, the real navy and virtual aviation in general. Very sad. I've gotten more email on that subject than I ever hoped to see. I'd like to post it, but so far ALL of it has been asked to be kept private to keep from invoking abuse from the ghods.

Vusn management just can not turn loose of the power to dictate and abuse without consequence to themselves. Fairness, honour and integrity is not something they have any interest in, personal power is where it is at for them.

Most organizations I have looked at have some method of handling problems, with vusn it is merely at the whims of the ghods. Anything they claim in that department is merely lip service to look good (looking good is far more important to vusn management than actually BEING good).

Take a look at this page:

USVN JAG Page

These people have a real interest in being a serious organization that is operationally AND people oriented to who they are. They have a real method of solving problems rather than hiding them under the rug.

The United States Virtual Navy (NOT to be confused with vusn) has vusn beat hands down in all areas.

After checking out the link above, spend some time exploring their site, it is an organization, unlike vusn, that honors the efforts of those heros who are out there every day keeping us free and safe. No sickly white anemic politically correct virtual airline mentality there :-).

VUSN could have been all that and more had it not been for the petty ghods that got control of it. Unfortunately it is now quite unlikely, even if there was some redress and method to get rid of the dead end mangement, that vusn will ever amount to anything other than an embarrasing little oddity. It does do one thing well, it serves as a bad example and how not to do a virtual organization. Good in the worst of things and all that :-).

Look around out there. There are FAR better choices than vusn.

Also, for the humor of it (sickly, but humor) vgeorge (vblatter) still has not had the integrity to follow up his mouth with my formal dismissal. Poor little lad, can't even do the wrong thing right.

On a final note, there are good people in vusn who do stay for whatever reason they do. I do know one in flag, but they have him muzzled and under their collective thumbs. Was he able to do something vusn would not be the disaster it is, but the ghods will never allow someone with integrity and a real interest in the organization in any position of consequence :-(.

Keep the light blue side up!

Salty out.

Cockroaches still hiding in the dark.

2006-01-27T16:06:00.000-08:00

Well, it has been about 10 days (+++) and the cockroaches running vusn are into full head in sand mode (shrinks call it avoidance :-), or rather hiding in the darkness pretending they are still gods and there are no problems.

Well, let me clarify the last, there are only problems that OTHER people cause, they are faultless you know ;-).

I guess I was really right about them having no managment skills and it only being a good ole boys club. These people are doing what they want no matter what. Utter failures and probably gives them the "power" they can't have in the real world. More likely the power that the people in the know wouldn't give them because they know them as we have come to know them.

I wonder if the captain of the Kennedy had the same quality of management under him? Experiences like this sure make one wonder.

You folks that have written me to ask me to address your problems to vusn, I guess I am not going to be able to for a couple of reasons. The cockroaches do not have the management skills, integrity, honor nor common decency to respond to anyone with a complaint. As we have seen, they curse you and pretend you do not exist and pretend to fire you rather than the rational thing. The ghods can't be bothered, they are too busy being what they can only be in their dreams - competent and important.

You will be far better off getting involved with some other virtual military organization and just letting everyone know of your experiences with vusn. From those of you mentioning VUSCG, the same top clown is also, in theory, involved in that, so beware if this is true, he probably does the same quality of job with that.

Of particular pathetic humor is that they still have not gotten around to officially firing me. Small wonder vusn is such a disaster, they can't even back up their temper tantrums (which, of course, they didn't have ;-). Big bad boys are too scared of me and this site to even do that much. As long as they can beat on you in the dark they are all real brave.

Of course apologizing for monstrous and unprofessional behavior and setting it right is not something vusn management is interested in, they are too important to deal with real world issues and duties.

How long can they go on pretending? Virtually forever, this is "their toy" and they can and will do whatever they want, honor and integrity be damned. Just sad that they try to make people think they are like the real U.S.Navy which is everything they are not and could never be.

I do feel for the people they are busily stomping on and forbidding them to do the right thing, there are good people in vusn, but with the current management they can do nothing without being shunned and fired (probably without really being fired :-). To those good people, I can only say hang in there, loosers like this will eventually go away and vusn can regain what it has lost so badly under the current management.

We have been a bit busy lately so posting has been sparse. We might be going back to work for the Navy, something I have no problem with in that the people really in there have rules and procedures and oversight when there are problems, unlike vusn.

We now have an IRC channel and I am working on a couple of backup sites. More on this as I get closer to done.

Note to vusn management loosers - fire me if you can get up the courage and manage to write a coherent message doing so. With things as they are, I would be proud and honored to be fired from a group with that level of management! Can you manage to back up your mouth with real action, for once? Fat chance...

But they can not handle that any better than anything else.

Salty out.

Yet More: current situation.

2006-01-16T16:02:00.000-08:00

Subject: Re: vUSN Activity
Date: Wednesday 11 January 2006 20:09
From: Pip Ragugini vCO HX-1
To: 'Todd Cox'
Cc: Zane-Yahoo , George Sandel
, 'Don Woolem' , 'F-David Waffler
VCNO' , Victoria Welch

WTF?

Okay I've held off up to now but this is really starting to upset me
now. --

Todd,

My position is unchanged, just to be clear I will re-state it here
for the record.

For whatever it may be worth: I absolutely *do not* agree with
Vikki's 'high energy' retaliation to CNO's reply to me, in which he
described her attempt to answer his previous query as '1.5 pages of
bullshit'.

HOWEVER, I fully share her frustration and stand by my previous
assertion that calling bullshit down on her answer to that query was
not justified, and I stand by my exception to that response.

It seems to have been completely side-lined that there was *no prior
defining context' within which CNO's query was sent. As such, to the
squadron, there was no idea of just how a response was to be
specifically framed. In that light, the response was commensurately
broad.

I agree certainly that there was a little 'chatter traffic' in
Vikki's response which could well have been omitted but that is just
Vikki, that's how she communicates and you would certainly know
that. Personally, I would have answered very differently but I'm not
Vikki and the query was directed specifically to her.

I stand by my assertion that Vikki's reply answered the query, or at
the least, gave sufficient indication of continued interest to
warrant a followup to reduce the breadth of the original context.
You must understand, that from the squadron's perspective, CNO's
query was received from out of nowhere, no prior messages, notices
or
communications regarding anything at all to do with the squadron.
There was certainly no notion of HX-1 having been de-commissioned,
or being considered for such..

But here's the thing... How is it okay to dump a squadron without
even bothering to notify the squadron CoC that such a decision was
even being considerd until after it's already a done deal? How is it
okay then to villify the squadron CoC for being rather 'annoyed' (to
put it mildly and cleanly) when the decision finally is made known
to them, post facto?

For myself personally, I had always, as able, kept Barry appraised of
my situation and status throughout the relocation and subsequent
problems with regular i'net access. I had contacted him periodically
from time to time to let him know how it was going and that I was
still here. My VUSN email remained operational throughout the time
and I responded to all necessary emails as able. It's not like I
just dropped off the planet, and prior arrangement was made before
the relocation to allow me an extended status of leave, with
periodic participation via the forum as able - which, incidentally,
has been on the increase with a now more reliable and regular access
to the i'net.

Some months ago, I receive a message from Barry asking if I still
intended to come back to full active status at some point, or if I
would rather just be 'retired' from active duty. I answered that
indeed it was still my intention to come back to full active status
once I could get all my equipment back together, and that I was now
available for 'administrative' duties regarding HX-1. Unf. for me,
getting back to active duty now means having to buy some new
controller hardware which I simply cannot justify as yet in light of
other financial burdens placed on me by this damned relocation. It
has really been a case of one thing after another, through which I
am only just holding on as it is.

Anyway, that message was the last squadron-specific related message I
had received from the CoC apart from those concerning Vikki's
re-instatement to the VUSN as XO HX-1, until the two messages from
Zane inquiring as to Vikki's continued intentions and then notifying
that HX-1 had been de-commissioned.

I, personally, feel the squadron has been very badly treated in
regards to the total lack of communication and involvement regarding
decisions of it's future existance.

Respectfully,

'Straightline'

Working on it... Really...

2006-01-16T15:32:00.000-08:00

I know I promised to get problems into the light, but I have ended up with a lot going on here. I'll apologise for being slow :-).

The current affair is eating up a lot of time and space, but I do think that if they will address the current issues that a number of those you have written to me about, if not all, will also be resolved. I will get to them.

Salty out.

And the beat goes on - No signs of life out of VUSN after a week...

2006-01-16T14:26:00.000-08:00

After a week I would have expected some good faith response to the issues presented, but it certainly appears that isn't going to happen with the current VUSN management.

Only management is entitled to screw their shipmates and then sail off scott free. VUSN members obviously have no recourse to any abuse they suffer.

They are going to address nothing other than what others than themselves do and stonewall the rest to the end.

Brings to mind the old saying about the definition of stupidity is the continuing to do the same things and expecting different results? Or was that the definition of insanity?

When will a response be forthcoming to the problems, abuses and complaints addressed in the following corresponance? Until VUSN gets some real management, I'd bet never. Unless something is posted otherwise, just count the days from when this was posted and add 5.

BTW, I'm still not officially fired :-), just censored from the looks of it. Like all the other problems, I do not exist :-). Seems that VUSN management thinks that burying the head in the sand works :-).

In going through this experience, I wonder how many other issues like these have been treated the same way and how many have walked off from VUSN in utter disgust? With stonewalling, censoring and pretending the problem(s?) don't exist being the apparent SOP there is simply just no way to know.

It did get a little deeper though, the one person working in good faith to resolve the issues has been ordered not to communicate with us.

Also, they did attempt to buy off my CO with a "choice and yummie important position", but that didn't work either :-), proud to say my CO knows the definition of honor and integrity.

They just do not get it and seem incapable of doing so, sigh, so very, very sad.

--------Message begins--------

From: Victoria Welch
To: Don Woolem, Zane-Yahoo, Pip Ragugini vCO HX-1, George Sandel, F-David Waffler, VCNO, Todd Cox, vusnwatch, vusnwatch2, vusnwatch6
Date: Jan 11, 2006 6:14 PM
Re: vUSN Activity

I should have heard something by this time, so we continue trying to
get this resolved in a rational manner.

On Friday 06 January 2006 18:36, you wrote:
> Pip, Vikki

Might want to add George and Zane to that, just to be fair in the
matter.

> This all has got to Stop,

Something we can all agree with!

> this bantering is immature.

Yes, to some degree, I am sure. It is a rotten method to have to
employ to get some discussion rather than irrational dictates going.

> I agree with
> Zane, after this you will hear nothing from me either and I know
> you will hear nothing for the CNO or VCNO since I have asked them
> to let me handle this. So After this, This is Final We will hear no
> more from you.

If you agree with the abuse going on, you are not the man I think
you are. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt based on your past
honorable performance and service, for the time being.

VCNO has proved to be an honorable person who is interested in the
problem rather than scapgoating it or sweeping it under the rug. If
he has been ordered to not communicate with me, then I will accept
that. I have already issued a formal apology to him for wrongfully
casting him in the villains role mostly through my confusion with too
many, not enough or inconsistent use of the little "v"s.

> Yes we are officers in this organization and as officers we follow
> orders, when we speak in disrespect to other officers it is
> insubordination.

I agree Sir, that is what started this whole thing off.

I have no problems with lawful orders but I do have a BIG problem
with abuse and I think there was a whole thing in Nuremberg, about 50
years ago now, about obeying bad orders.

> Vikki, your attitude I must say is Insubordinate.

And what other choices were I given? Or is it only "insubordination"
when someone not on flag staff does it, which is increasingly seeming
to be how it is?

It either applies to all or it doesn't. Which is it? Please clarify.

> If I would have asked what was going on to one of my subordinates
> or even one of the Lts under my command, they would have been
> severely reprimanded.

Apparently that is indeed the case. Given insufficient information,
cursed and belittled and then responding to that, sure seems like a
good reason to reprimand just one (or two) .

I could understand that if the response to the initial query and
response had been rational or respectfully phrased and that
subordinates had any recourse. It wasn't and there isn't. At least
I didn't have to resort to cursing people.

Further, if you have checked the roster, I am not a lieutenant which
seems to make a bit of difference, I may not be part of the clique but
I am a flag officer with responsibility to the organization not
necessarily to the abusers.

Yes, I did escalate this more than was really called for, for that I
do apologize, but I DID NOT START THIS. Being cursed and belittled
does not bring out my better side, especially when presented with
wholly unrespectful, inappropriate and abusive behavior. There were
so many better ways to handle this rather than an abusive temper
tantrum that I don't even want to have to start to write them all
down, most of them can be found in any basic management course.

> Simple answers, you were both under the
> restricted line status since you did not have to place any flight
> hours, the only thing you had to do was give us an idea of what you
> were working on. Not hard.

Then why was I asked about my lack of filing PIREPS? That seems no
more coherent than the rest?

Nope, it wasn't difficult. Seems that multiple people had a real
problem both reading and comprehending the information I gave in
total ignorance of the situation at hand. What bothers me now is
that apparently only a very few had a clue about what was going on
behind the scenes and they had not bothered to clear it up before it
became such a festering sore. Have communications formally become a
guessing game for the rank and file of this organization?

> I was privy to all the e-mails. Not a
> hard,

I surely seems that reading them and understanding and / or requesting
clarification(s) of them took a much lower priority to being bothered
with the reported facts as understood by the person responding.
Initially there was no animosity before it was provoked by George.

> I expect reports from the people doing scenery and other
> things

And if you don't get them you send the CNO to belittle and curse them?

Would a simple email not have been in order here? You were well
aware of the situation going on with HX-1 and didn't bother to
communicate what you knew to, apparently, anyone. Doing that alone
might have well kept everyone here from wading through this mess.

> HX-1, was actually canned by Barry Guttersmon, not this staff.

From what feedback I have gotten, it appears that Barry was used up
and burned out from lack of support, while I don't condone those
actions, I can understand how that happens. When those you depend on
fail, it creates a real mess and when someone leaves over that kind
of thing, it is quite obvious there are much deeper problems yet
unaddressed.

> Since Pip was actually retired with out his knowing. I knew about
> it and I asked Barry to try to get in contact with him and let him
> know what we were doing, he told me he was doing that and he was in
> contact with Pip Vikki came back because she was asked by Pip.
> That was ran up the chain by me to Todd. I thought it was a good
> idea since I thought it would be nice to see if we could get some
> of the Old VUSN people back.

I'd haveto ask Pip about this, I know he was absent for extended
periods, but I am SURE he would be checking his email as often as was
possible under the circumstances, if he received such email, I am not
aware of it.

Interesting to note that there certainly do seem to be a lot of "Old
VUSN People", don't there?

> Thought we could Start up the
> developmental side with the helos, But interest in the helos has
> dropped off significantly Never thought this would go on like
> this. This is where it will stop.

Respectfully Sir, no this is not where it will stop. Burying heads in
the sand only works for those doing so. Both myself and
Pip have been wronged then abused, when that is corrected in a
professional manner, THEN it will stop.

Several things bother me about this:

Helos have NEVER been either a significant in quantity nor something
that garners mass gatherings in either the real or virtual world.
This is a very well known and obvious fact.

Secondly, this has been going on for a while and HX-1 apparently did
not exist when I rejoined it. Might have been a factor in all this,
don't you think? You were directly in that loop at the beginning, you
could have simply informed me rather than providing a set up for all
this balderdash that has gone on since. Merely an oversight or
intentional?
From what I know of you historically, it has to be an oversight, but
things like this can not continue to happen.

> But we will not have a Squadron that is Inactive or a group that is
> inactive. Doesn't make sense

Do you really want me to have to cover this? HX-1 was indeed
inactive and with GOOD reason, but I do not see any significant
activity elsewhere. Who and what else with next to no activity is
being considered?

> If you want to stay and contribute You may but we need some
> activity and some signs of life with activity.

Unfortunately that was in the works and pretty close to happening, we
could have communicated better on this, but HX-1 has generally been
left alone to do what it does until it gets done.

The admitted total lack of communications to HX-1 should be proof
enough that this only became relevant well after the fact. You can
surely blame us for not doing a better job, but you and VUSN
management in general have done no better.

> if you do not, Thank you for your participation. And we will part
> ways and then you will be placed on the Retired list, you can let
> me know what your decision is and we will work from there.

I am not going away Don.

All this could have been EASILY prevented with some comms from above
without the abuse, that is what started it and what has kept it
going.

Contrary to what appears to be SOP in VUSN, I have NEVER seen ANY
organization where that kind of behavior was acceptable to and
encouraged by senior management. Not one that lasted very long
anyway or wasn't considered a total joke once the word got out.

> This
> organization uses Microsoft Flightsim 2004 Only and all aspects
> of this program.

Again, either this is ignorance, blustering or Todd has changed his
mind about this and not bothered to inform anyone (or, looking at the
current situation, someone hasn't bothered to communicate). IIRC,
there was no objection to X-Plane (or anything else) in situations
where it did not create a problem.

Interestingly VATSIM doesn't have a problem with X-Plane or anything
else that can meet their standards.

For combined ops where scenery is an issue, I will agree. Elsewhere
it has no relevance.

> When time comes, we will upgrade to the new one
> when ever it may come out. This is a Hobby and we should be having
> fun.

I certainly agree, but I personally find no fun in either being
treated like a mushroom nor in the ongoing abuse. I can stand
criticism, but I will not be cursed.

> We do not need negative attitudes

Respectfully, VUSN has negative attitudes in mass quantities and are
encouraging more all the time. The longer you drag this out the more
negative attitudes you are going to create and the more damage you do
to VUSN, and worse, it's people.

> If you do not like us (
> the VUSN )

I very much do like VUSN, othewise I wouldn't waste the energy to try
to correct, or at least make someone aware of, some very serious
flaws in the organization that desperately need to be addressed.

> or do not like the way we are running it I'm sorry

No, I don't like the way it is being run. If you were actually sorry
about it, you would be doing something other than "killing the
messenger" don't you think?

> ,I
> see no problem with what we have done in the past

Don, VUSN has communications problems at the very least. Whether
there are reasons for George and Zanes behavior, I don't know. I've
certainly been in situations where lack of support and no comms have
lead me to burn out badly and be less than the stellar person I
normally am :-). I've learned from those experiences and find that
fixing the problem is a whole lot better option than pretending that
there isn't a problem(s).

> or are doing in
> the future.

Sorry, this makes no sense, you can't do anything until you get to the
future :-). By then it is the present :).

> If you do not want to be a part of it I'm sorry.

If I didn't want to be part of an organization I could be proud of, do
you think I would be going through all this? Really Don, come ON.

> I do apologize for only one thing, and that was when HX-1 was
> disbanded, I as the CNO at the time should have made sure that
> Barry did contact Pip.

Yes, that would have certainly been nice, you blew it, get over it,
fix the problem and move on. Faulty comms happen, the important
thing to do is to correct the reasons for the problem and move on to
better things. NOT abuse the people that have been kept in the dark
and that are trying to deal with it all.

Gets back into the idea of backups and attention to detail, but this
message is not the time or place to get into that.

> I thought he was keeping me totally
> informed. You lead me to believe other wise, for that I am sorry.

Don, for Gods sake, quit apologizing and just do what needs to be done
to straighten out this mess! THEN we can all put this mess behind us
and move on rather than continuing to wallow in it.

> But, with no one in the squadron or the only person in the squadron
> not active the only choices were disband and Retire the CO or place
> them in the gray eagles but even after some time even those make
> the retire list after no activity after so many months. So Bottom
> Line, either stay and play by our rules, or resign, and /or retire.

I'll be glad to play by the rules, but I am not going to be held
accountable for others who have not and those being abusive when
caught at it.

This is supposed to be fun for EVERYONE, not just the power seekers /
holders.

> Those are the options, I do not think there will be any other ones.

Yes, Don there are other options, GOOD ones. Do the right thing, that
is ALL it takes to fix this whole mess.

> I will not stand for any insubordination that I have seen.

Apparently, so it certainly appears to me, the only insubordination
you are standing for is management insubordination / abuse /
disrespect.

I've already admitted that I escalated it more than was needed and
apologized for it, but when I get cursed and belittled for NO rational
reason, just what did you expect would happen?

What options does one have in VUSN to have offenses by abusive,
censoring and stonewalling management redressed? Go to the vJAG?
Contact information please? I seem to have missed that option on the
website?

Unlike so many before, I am not going to just leave in disgust
(embarrassed to admit that I did do that once before). You
can fire me. Yes, you can, but I am going to fight injustice and
abuse all the way down. If you do fire me, then that is just an
direct admission of failure on VUSN managements part and the problems
will go on and just come up again at a later time, probably worse.

> That
> will be it, the decision will be final and you will be gone from
> the VUSN.

If this isn't going to be resolved, then you can indeed do so, but I
will guarantee you that I will not be forgotten and will be an
ongoing PR headache. I'm getting enough material through VUSN Watch
to make life interesting for us all for some time to come. Wouldn't
it be simpler to just fix the problems and let the past go for a
brighter future where this kind of thing doesn't come up in the first
place?

> If you do not want to be apart of this org, Leave, we
> will hold no ill feelings we do not need grief we get enough of
> that real world

You keep repeating this and I'll do the same, I want to be part of
this organization and have been so for a long time. I am not going to
leave to help anyone screwing up stay comfortable or worse, feel they
can get away with it.

Don, please and really, people who dictate, curse and abuse OBVIOUSLY
have some ill feelings that are coloring their actions badly, I'm
slow but not stupid.

The grief has not been brought on by me, other than possibly making
some management uncomfortable knowing their actions were and are
unacceptable. Mistakes happen, the object is to FIX THE PROBLEM.

Killing the messenger is NOT fixing the problem.

> This is a hobby where we all hold the same
> interest and we have friends that we associate with. and Have FUN.

I'd like to get over this and get back to making VUSN something like
it used to be - an organization with potential that stands out for
something positive and honorable in the virtual aviation field and
attracts people rather than putting them off and running them out.

> By Direction

Sorry Don, this looks more like by dictate than by direction:

I'm just trying to request VUSN to operate in an open and honest
manner and not solve problem by either killing the messenger nor
sweeping problems under the rug (or out the door as the case may be).
I'd rather be able to give respect for just cause rather than have it
demanded under penalty of dismissal.

If that can't happen then VUSN is indeed doomed by it's own hand and I
do NOT wish to see that happen.

Take care, Vikki

NNNN

Looks like Salty has some corrections to make to the last post.

2006-01-10T18:24:00.000-08:00

Well,

Nothing heard, I think the burnout theory was optomism on my part.

More to follow.

Salty out.

Salty screws up - corrections and apologies.

2006-01-07T16:09:00.000-08:00

Salty is running WELL behind the curve today but when Salty makes an error, Salty admits it, corrects it as soon as possible and moves on. Some things can wait, this needs to be addressed.

I have finally received two rational responses, one of them most interested in dealing with the problem and the other trying to deal with it and I am still sorting that one out.

I made an error of assumption based on the following and with some confusion on my part.

In checking before I posted this, I find why I am confused thus causing my error:

vADM George "Boomer" Sandel
CNO, vUSN

and

F-David Waffler VCNO

Salty has become confused with CNO and vCNO and VCNO and vVCNO.

I think this means that the virtual CNO is George and the virtual VICE CNO is David.

At any rate, please mentally correct any "vcno"s that you see to read "Virtual CNO" not to be read as "VICE CNO". Too many or not enough or not consistant little "v"s :-).

Apologies for unintentionally casting David as one of the offending parties, he is not. He has made impressive effort at actually dealing with the problem and opening dialog and communications in a highly professional manner and is in NO WAY at fault.

My sincerest personal apology to David.

Of further interest, the two emails in the past 24 hours have given me more actual information than I have had all together. Certainly a long way from being expected to know everything and respond in the desired form with no actual factual information.

What may well be the issue is that Flag Staff is suffering from people who made commitments and are not honoring them thus putting undue and excess strain on people who are actually trying to do the job to the best of their abilities with no support.

In the interest of fairness, both the outrages by George and likely Zane as well (I am not publishing that fisking at this point) may have been brought on by actually caring but running at the edge or into burnout trying.

Salty knows too damn well the effects of too many demands and lack of support. Salty is also aware how burnout affects performance of even the best of people (from way too much unpleasant experience in that department).

If this is indeed the case, then Salty has more apologies to issue, but we will be sure before we issue them.

Taking David at his word, if there are people failing to do their jobs and screwing other people over in the process, I call for a keelhauling of each and every one of them. I formally request to be the one pulling on the lines, I can guarantee that I will make the experience everything they never want it to be and will extract full retribution for their crimes (yes, IMO if not in law it is criminal behavior).

To fail to honor ones commitments is about as low as it gets and be it known that Salty is highly offended by that kind of slimeball, they drag everyone down and make an organization look really bad. There is no lower form of life than those that screw their shipmates.

What is really sad about this is that these people do not have to dishonor themselves and rape their shipmates by either not making commitments they have no intention nor ability to keep (real or imagined) in the first place or by having a backup / backup plan in place if they can't fullfill thier commitments. Worst case have the integrity to formally resign so the people who have to pick up the slack can look for a replacement who can and will do the job and don't have to stand around waiting for something that will never come and then have to burn themselves out trying to make up for these shitwits. People holding on to "important positions" just to have an "important position" should be punished as horribly as possible.

There is a special place in hell for those who screw their shipmates.

As I told David, VUSN Watch is NOT here just to show the seamy sides of VUSN. When comms fail or there are flies in the ointment and caring and committed people have no place else to go, you bet we will expose the cockroaches to the light. By the same token positive events and occurances will receive the very same attention. We are not the lamestream media with an agenda to make the military (virtual or real) look bad just for the sake of a destructive agenda.

More to follow.

Salty out.

Welcome aboard!

2006-01-06T12:42:00.000-08:00

To my surprise, in one day we acquire two members and contributers to the blog.

Welcome aboard vusnwatch6 and Gunny!

Looks like some activity on the current issue...

2006-01-06T00:24:00.000-08:00

The following was forwarded to me from a person whom has asked that he not be exposed with a tyrant on the loose.

Fear not, The Gunny will not ever set you up to be had as the offended parties were by this vcno, NEVER, EVER, we take care of the good guys! Semper Fi!

It warms my heart to see a CO go to bat for his troops and is even strong enough and has enough integrity to admit an error and correct it! As Salty said to me, he probably won't be re-instated either...

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: Re: vUSN Activity
Date: Thursday 05 January 2006 23:45
From: Pip Ragugini vCO HX-1
To: George Sandel
Cc: 'Zane-Yahoo' , 'Don Woolem' , 'F-David Waffler VCNO' , 'Todd Cox' , Victoria Welch

George Sandel wrote:
>Pip,
>
>I see that there was gross mis-communication here.
>
>I am willing to re-visit the situation and try to
>
>repair it if possible. But, Victoria Welch will
>
>not be re-instated to the vUSN. I will discuss
>
>it with the Flag Staff and try to come up with a
>
>solution that is accepted by all involved.
>
>Give me a couple days, please , I will get back
>
>to you.

Sir,

Apart from reminding you that I have not yet received any
further regarding the above, I would also take this
opportunity to officially and formally redress an
outstanding related issue that I had, to my shame,
deliberately 'overlooked'.

Below is an extract of your response in a prior
communication regarding the canning of HX-1. I'm sure
you'll recognise the context. I had 'let it slide' on the
misguided notion of practiced diplomacy, my error. I
realise now I should simply have addressed it right there
and then and for that I appologise to all, and to my XO in
particular.

On Wednesday 07 December 2005 04:43, George Sandel wrote:

[...]

> have. I had a inquiry sent to Viki, requesting her,
> intentions. All I got back was 1.5 pages of bullshit. I
> don't play those games, I have an organization to run.

[...]

As squadron CO, I take considerable exception to the
calling down of 'bullshit' on my XO who was responding to
a very broadly, and somewhat vaguely, worded request.
Specifically as follows:

On Monday 05 December 2005 07:04, Zane-Yahoo wrote:
> Hi Vicki,
> At the request of the CNO, I would like to ask what your
> intentions are here at the vUSN?

It is my opinion that the above question was very much
answered in my XO's response, in depth. Given the
broadness and vagueness of the original question I believe
my XO's response was appropriately and commensurately
broad in it's scope. It contained several attached prior
email communiques relevant to answering the request as
stated.

I do not think it was appropriate, nor professional, to
have qualified my XO's attempt to answer your request the
best way possible under the circumstances as 'bullshit'.
Given that the future of HX-1 was being considered, I also
find it rather shameful that that very fact *WAS NOT EVER
EVEN MENTIONED* in any of the communications from up the
CoC relating to this subject. Not to mention that no
communication whatsoever specifically notifying the
squadron commander or acting commander that the squadron
was even being considered for the can was ever sent from
up the CoC in the first place!

Given that the squadron had been kept completely in the
dark regarding the decisions being made about it's fate
right up to the point where the decision to can the
squadron had been finalised, given the request for a
statement of intentions came outside of any prior defining
context, given the vagueness of the request for a
statement of intentions and given the broadness of scope
implied in said vagueness I can only conclude that the
broadness of my XO's response was both appropriate and
indeed commensurate. It answered the question in depth,
what else would you have expected?

I am very much not satisfied with the level direct
communication to the squadron from up the CoC throughout
this whole situation. Insofar as the squadron was
concered, there was a single communique asking for a
statement of intention, there was then a single email some
time later notifying the squadron that it had been
disbanded. There was no prior notice regarding that the
future of the squadron was under consideration, or any
other related information whatsoever. The squadron has an
*active* member who is not only XO but also acting CO.
Both myself and the XO are and have always been
contactable via email and the forum throughout.

Respectfully,

--
--
RDML Philippe Ragugini,
AIRTESTDEVRON ONE (HX-1) "The Sea Furies",
NAVY Patuxant River NAWC MD, commanding,
Virtual United States Navy.

------
"Cry war, destruction, ruin and decay... the worst is
death, and death shall have his day."

-------------------------------------------------------
End forward...

Yes, there are honorable people there. Sad that they fear retribution.

Still waiting....

2006-01-05T19:05:00.000-08:00

Here is what started coming back after one of the crapped on DARED to call attention to the vCNOs gross misconduct and failed to roll over and take it as was demanded.

Note the date...

The double spaced lines are vcno's, guess he has a problem using his email program :-).

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: vUSN Activity
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 18:28:58 -0600
From: George Sandel
To: {redacted}
CC: 'Zane-Yahoo' , 'Don Woolem'
, 'F-David Waffler VCNO' , 'Todd
Cox'

{addressee}

I see that there was gross mis-communication here.

Well, that much was slightly more than glaringly obvious AND well after the fact considering this persons squadron was summarily dumped with absolutely NO inclusion of the interested (offended) parties.

I am willing to re-visit the situation and try to

repair it if possible.

This is the chief ghod who can act at will with no communications but uses "if possible". If he wanted to he would have done so, again probably disregarding any acceptable management methods as appears to be habitual.

But, {second abused party} will

not be re-instated to the vUSN. I will discuss

it with the Flag Staff and try to come up with a

solution that is accepted by all involved.

Accepted by "all". Good to see such a fine grasp of the language. What this says is "do not call me on my screwups no matter how unacceptably arrogant, rude, foul mouthed or out of line I am and you better get that message or you won't be re-instated either" You will kiss the arse of the one true ghod and LIKE it.

Give me a couple days, please , I will get back

to you.

Well, it is for all practical purposes a month since this message, his integrity holds consistant. It sure looks like CYA, censorship and stonewalling are on his personal job description and the order of the day.

I wonder why he can't get two lines together. Or should that be obvious :-)?

vADM George "Boomer" Sandel
CNO, vUSN

Noticed that the avoided using the word "Respectfully" as he usually does in his communications, since I pointed out that he doesn't know what the word means. Of course it has become obvious that he has no respect for anyone not submitting to his will...

How long will the CYA, threatening, stonewalling and censorship go on? How long will VUSN allow this kind of gross and abusive mis-management to continue?

Stay Tuned!

Also, of note, the banned and "will not be re-instated" party still has not been officially informed of this decision.

Add cowardice to the other obvious fine personal attributes of CYA, threats, censorship and stonewalling. Since his ego can't handle discussion and fully expects to do whatever he wants with no responsibilty, we can expect this to continue until VUSN deals with the situation, if it does.

He is obviously utterly perplexed as to why this is happening...

Salty out.

Good Ole Boys Club or what?

2006-01-04T19:02:00.000-08:00

I've gotten a couple reports of people who attempted to join VUSN and were apparently unable to do so.

From what info I have so far, apparently there was just no response to their queries and they went elsewhere.

Waiting and looking for further information on this issue.

If you know anything either email me or leave a comment. Your privacy is assured.

Salty, out.

Sent today, awaiting response.

2006-01-02T12:40:00.000-08:00

[Edit: Note: A second message was sent to all parties correcting the address of vusnwatch.COM ].

To: vusn@vusn.org
Headers [ ... ]

Sir,

Attempting to log into the forums, the following message is displayed:

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Begin Include -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Virtual United States Navy Forum Forum Index
Critical Information

You have been banned from this forum.
Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= End include=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

If this should go to someone else that I missed, please forward as necessary with my thanks.

This is a request for information on this. Related login is: V0134 / {email}

I'd not like to think that this is censorship but rather an error someplace.

I am requesting an official response to this matter which will be posted to http://vusnwatch.blogspot.org, so please make it official and include any information relevant to this issue.

Thanks for your efforts in this matter!

Sincerely, Salty.

Status and Seasons Greetings

2005-12-24T17:14:00.000-08:00

Things have been quiet here but things are going on behind the scenes.

We are planning on the formal launch of this site in early January.

Still no word on the current situation, still ongoing (no, we are not going away :).

We have heard of some problems of note with VUSN even though this site is pretty much unknown at this point in time. We'll be posting those as well once we go live and pestering the VUSN leadership for further information on what is reported to us.

Just to let Y'all know that we're still here and still plunking away at it.

Merry Christmas and a Happy, safe and peaceful new year to you and yours from all of us.

Salty, out.

Ongoing...

2005-12-11T00:27:00.000-08:00

After sending a message advising the vCNO that censorship was not going to work either, I did hear from the organizations founder. He is generally pretty good so I am holding on further work here for the time being.

He would like to see us work it out and so would I.

But we'll hold on more of this to see what happens.

Standby.

Salty Out.

Why this blog...

2005-12-10T11:39:00.000-08:00

Unfortunately, there are organizations in the virtual world that have all the problems (and worse) as those in the real world. Since they are "playtoy" entities, they get little or no scrutiny and really should. Especially when they claim represent (virtually) honorable institutions.

We'll work essentially like Soldiers For The Truth.

After having been insulted, offended, cursed and ignored, I was thrown out of the organization for requesting a fair hearing on the matter at hand (management blew it BIG time), but the ghods couldn't lower themselves to do the honorable thing, so I'll be depending on members who know enough to keep mouth shut and head down when dealing with management to let us know what goes on.

How do I know I was thrown out? Officially I don't.

They don't have either the integrity nor honor to tell me themselves (full CYA mode, I think it is called :-). Someone still in the organization sent me a copy in the light I might want to know :-).

Fortunately, in the worst of institutions there are honorable people who do not appreciate the "Und You Vill Like it!" style of management.

There are many fine people in that organization, but there is also endemic rot from the top, it should be known so people can make an honest decision about whether they want to get involved with it.

While those of us with a love for the U.S.Navy and Naval Aviation want to be associated with it in some form, even virtually, the question arises as to whether that organization truely represents the soul and spirit of what they claim, or it is just the trappings hiding another "Good Ole Boy's Club"?

There are other options out there that perhaps one should research more deeply before getting involved in what can be a very unpleasant situation.

If you just want to fly under that banner and can avoid the politics (good luck) then do just that and nothing more and you might be OK. "Yes Sir, BZ Sir!" is a real good approach, no matter what happens.

When the perpetrators should have responded with rational discourse, they chose to kick me out of the organization (no real loss as things are and have been for some time) and immediately clamped down with full censorship of the entire issue. I recognized this immediately from other situations in the past that they had handled equally open and honestly in the past (yes, that was sarcasm :-), unfortunately, at the time, I bought into it "for the good of the service".

Nothing can be seen that reflects badly on what is, essentailly, SOP. There is good reason for this in managements mind, if they are accountable, they wouldn't be quite the ghods they envision themselves to be and would have to follow basic rules of management in force in any well regulated institution.

If you have something to share in this light, let me know and I will see that it gets the appropriate attention. If it needs to be anonymous, I can understand the need.

I would also like to see VUSN be what it purports to be. The amount of respect I have for the real US Navy and Naval Aviation in general is unbounded. The do not deserve dishonor in any form. They are the best and thank God we have them out there.

I'll be posting the current events here shortly and I have some of the others on file. It is tedious reading, to be kind, and a lot of it, but you will get the information fully so you can make your own decisons on the matters.

All my opinions my own based on my own experiences, you draw your own :-)!

Salty out