[PyrNet-L] GPCA protest rebuttal

[MarciaJ1@aol.com]

    The letter sent to the members of the GPCA,reprinted here on the list
,looks like a sad attempt to influence people based on  obscuring and
confusing  the issues and impugning the integrity of the board members that
voted against the application for membership.The issue is one of ethics not
ownership(as a number of pyrnet members quickly noted)The hyperbole regards
the GPCA  in our whelping boxes or deciding on dog ownership can only be
looked at as inflammatory and obfuscatory.
     As others pointed out so well,if one contracts with another to register a
domain name and work on a web site,that name does not then belong to the
person contracted with and paid for that service. A kennel name is a business
name,the more established it is,the more recognition there is,the more
valuable it is and probably  more worth stealing.
And certainly if we can see this with so can board members.The protest appears
to hinge on maligning the integrity of the members of the board that voted
against the applicant.There seems to be an unsubstantiated charge of politics
and threats.Perhaps it is just more likely that they saw the issue for what it
is,one of unethical behavior and business practice.Of course GPCA board
members know,know of and/or have personal relationships with other club
members but they also have taken on a responsibility as a board member.There
is no reason to think they cannot act with objectivity and personal integrity
and in fact are counted on to do so. This is a low blow to some fine people.
    Personal integrity  and ethics or lack there-of seems to be the issues
here and however they may be later obscured the vote was taken,the decision
rendered by those in closest contact with the evidence.Frankly the only real
mystery is why anyone would want to stand up,proudly or otherwise for this.
Marcia