SoSueTriciaGate: REPOSTED!

This post is so perfect I'm reposting it .. see original post on the RadioNewz blog here.

SoSueTriciaGate

Newsflash. SoSueTricia is no business person.

Nor is she a social network-savvy angel investor.

An investor performs due diligence (IN ADVANCE) with regard to markets, income sources, financials, tax filing history, staff, possible debts, ownership claims, and risks, negotiates and puts $11K in escrow until terms of deal are met (or not).

A business person protects the integrity of the business she just invested in by NOT sharing partnership strife with non-equity volunteers and members.

Acquiring ongoing businesses typically involve a transitional closing period over time. Sometimes a full quarter, sometimes a year. When there’s problem with closing the deal terms, a business person gets on the phone, or on a plane, conducts a meeting, and seeks to clarify and resolve problems in person.

The LAST thing a business person does is waste time, money, goodwill and human capital dispatching spies and lies and gas lighting an entire force of good-hearted volunteers and then filing a largely frivolous lawsuit.

That’s all just common sense.

The rest of this – below -- is just my opinion – FWIW and IANL.

Read Plaintiff’s first pleading. It’s over-reaching and mischaracterizes the agreement. Read Plaintiff’s decision to post the lawsuit on the forum. Again -- not a business person’s choice. Read Plaintiff’s “Gambling Questions” Motion to Compel. What would any alleged gambling expenditures have to do with any breach of contract? Nothing. A breach may exist if agreement terms were broken -- if Tricia received more than the $3K/mo management compensation agreed to from the business income from WS – if Tricia willfully failed to transfer WS assets in her name into the new WS,LLC in the time allotted – and refused to correct any oversights on a timely basis. A breach may exist if Tricia received compensation in lieu of paying the fixed ongoing expenses of WS -- and such “bookkeeping oversight” was not corrected in reasonable time of the error being discovered. There is no breach if Sue never recovers her investment. (There is only bad judgment on Sue’s part.) So far in these pleadings and depos and exhibits, if there have been clear material breaches of the agreement, Sue has not proven this.

So … what could be the objective of this latest Motion -- compelling answers to Gambling questions?

Is Sue’s objective to straighten out the Websleuths, LLC financials? To preserve and protect the members, mods, culture and spirit of Websleuths? To recover her $11K “investment”? To push Tricia out with a hostile takeover-like move? Or is it to blame, punish and publicly humiliate Tricia because … two years later, Sue realizes, she speculated poorly, does not understand how to make money on the internet, and, in fact, made a very stupid investment.

From this outside perspective … it feels like the latter.

All these secret alignments, secret threads, secret chats, secret tape recorded calls, secret mutiny of volunteer staff … (c’mon -- has no psychopathology been studied on Websleuths?) – it feels so … Toxic personality. Someone is quite masterful at manipulating others. Even groups.

And along with that toxic personality pathology, would go the love of frivolous litigation, (c’mon, $11K invested in a business that has no profitability; who chooses to litigate that?), and the classic inability to take responsibility for one’s own mistakes. But,this investment bungle can’t be Sue’s responsibility -- it must be Tricia’s fault. Tricia must be punished. Tricia must suffer for Sue’s mistake, for Sue’s lack of business acumen, for Sue’s ego.

SoSueTricia. Indeed.

Welcome out of the fog, mods!  Mortified? Ashamed? We get it.

But, why waste time & energy blaming each other? Take a breath, take responsibility, and think about who actually duped you, abused your good hearts, and who the real victim here is. Get off the sidelines. Step up and earn your redemption. Disclosing the back-door manipulation Websleuths’ new “partner/owner” undertook to force Tricia out of Websleuths’ ownership is a start.

Hopefully, with a bit more cooperation and a bit less blame-laying those in the know will help bring these false allegations to a quick end, force a settlement, oust the clearly miserable and unhappy “new owner” and let Websleuths be on its way to recovery.

Truthful affidavits and screen shot exhibits can work wonders to accelerate justice. Maybe it all happened for a reason.

And thanks Radio, for the forum.