Forum Steering Committee - Volunteers Needed

[lonely_john]

I am concerned that if we get too far ahead of ourselves, enthusiastic members will become too invested in a particular plan; then a new owner may say that he or she is not interested in doing things that way.

@Charlie that's a very valid point but it actually sounds like you know something that others don't.

I haven't followed all the threads so I apologize if this has been asked before:

Who are the potential candidates that the court could appoint as the new owner?

[Guest]

@WilliamM What relevance does this have to the subject of discussion?

The King of the Non Sequiturs strikes again. This man loves to take off on completely irrelevant tangents...

[+ Orin]

@Charlie that's a very valid point but it actually sounds like you know something that others don't.

I haven't followed all the threads so I apologize if this has been asked before:

Who are the potential candidates that the court could appoint as the new owner?

 

IANAL, but...

 

In the absence of a will, the court would first determine who is to be the executor or administrator of the estate. There's a hierarchy to follow for this process, beginning with certain values of 'kin', which a court representative is supposed to explore. That person is then empowered to determine the value of the estate. In the case of these sites, because they are not operated to produce a profit for the owner, the question becomes what was the value for which Bill had been running them. The intrinsic value of these sites is simply to benefit the community which use them. A cogent executor or administrator might then inquire about this, and then use the willingness of the community to take responsibility for it to guide the disposition of the sites.

 

The executor would note that Bill's friends had paid for his funeral expenses, and ask them for input. Knowing what the community's goals are would make it possible for us to help guide that decision. And if we are selected to be Administrator, so much the better.

[mike carey]

@Charlie that's a very valid point but it actually sounds like you know something that others don't.

I haven't followed all the threads so I apologize if this has been asked before:

Who are the potential candidates that the court could appoint as the new owner?

The court won't appoint a new owner, it will decide who is to administer Bill's estate. That person will decide what happens to the site.

[+ Charlie]

@Charlie that's a very valid point but it actually sounds like you know something that others don't.

I haven't followed all the threads so I apologize if this has been asked before:

Who are the potential candidates that the court could appoint as the new owner?

I don't know anything that others don't. But I have been around a long time, and have seen other situations in which participants get very excited about planning something, only to discover that they don't really have enough information about the context. I think that making plans for something as complicated as running this site, without the involvement of the person or persons who will be legally responsible for the site, is premature. If a group wants to brainstorm options for new purposes or structures for the site, that's fine, but I fear they may make emotional commitments to a particular plan which they will try to sell to the members, before there is any assurance that there is an owner who is interested in going along with it.

[Guest]

The court won't appoint a new owner, it will decide who is to administer Bill's estate. That person will decide what happens to the site.

I'm amazed at your knowledge of Nevada estate law!

[+ stevenkesslar]

Steven is really that old? Is he retired?

 

Yes to the first question. I don't know about the second. ?

 

Can we just all for once admit the truth? I hope in the future I can be a role model of what not to do. Ignorant whore doesn't even cover it.

 

Since we're revealing things about each other, I know for a fact @Unicorn is known for his empathetic bedside manner. If I got sick, he's obviously the kind of doctor I'd want making me feel better. So him teasing me about what he thinks he knows about my age is way too kind. He's not even discussing my small dick. @latbear4blk, who is a sweetheart, used to always tease me about that. Personally, I think it's a great thing that a small-dicked escort didn't let that stand in the way. Just like it's a great thing when a small-minded poster doesn't let that stand in the way of how he attacks people.

 

But @Unicorn is simply being way too kind. Somehow, despite being a small-dicked ignorant whore, I was financially successful. Then, being essentially ignorant, I made the mistake of investing in real estate instead of drugs. I mean, I deserve as much slack as the next guy. But how many times can a guy fuck up? My own doctor actually felt sorry for me. A few years ago, he asked me how I ended up retiring so early while owning 13 homes. I said, "Isn't it obvious, doc? I'm ignorant, and I have a small dick." I also have dementia. So I may not have said that, exactly. But it was something close.

 

It gets worse. This has been a cruel affliction to my escort buddies. One was getting kicked out of his condo because the owner was selling it. So I bought the condo so he didn't have to move. Such a fucking asshole! I also have legal problems. Once COVID clears I need to find a lawyer who can tell us how I can legally gift the condo to my friend. So basically I'm a super duper asshole. Empathetic guys like @Unicorn would not even treat his dog the way I treat my friends.

 

And let's just paint the grim ending, shall we? Being a smart guy, @Unicorn knows a lot of things. Like my age. He also knows these 22 cunts in Houston who claim to be "professional masseuses" are basically liars and greedy whores leeching money off a person of means. As @Unicorn posted, what is a person of means, such as himself, supposed to do with all these greedy and lying whores trying to leech off people like him? That goes to the core of his compassionate world view. And I have to admit, I'm both jealous and sad. Before I was pathetically old and wretched, I once hoped to be a person of means myself, like @Unicorn. Instead, fate and bad genetics and my addiction to real estate fucked up my life, and made me the wreck that I am. Not even an extremely compassionate doctor like @Unicorn could cure what ails me.

 

So, @Unicorn, please don't feel like you have to be so kind. It's one of the nicest things about you. But I know who I am.

[+ tassojunior]

Or, better yet, old sexagenerian escorts who post frequently, such as @stevenkesslar

If @stevenkesslar gets on don't let him set the length of posts.

[+ stevenkesslar]

If @stevenkesslar gets on don't let him set the length of posts.

 

Jesus Fucking Christ! Do I have to spell everything out? Long posts are a form of overcompensation for a small dick. In between Bel Ami porn films you might want to buy a psychology book.

[+ stevenkesslar]

... the gears of the legal system will be engaged shortly. Whatever happens, it would be wise for there to be a plan in place when the time comes to take action.

 

So please keep up this discussion, and work towards some decisions about your collective future.

 

All of this means that it is time to decide who will own and run this place.

 

I agree with @sam.fitzpatrick. The sites are currently a business with an owner, who is now deceased. Until there is a legal resolution of the ownership, and the new owner decides how he or she wishes the sites to be run, we are simply spinning our own ideas of how things should be run. Those ideas may be helpful to the new owner, or he or she may completely disregard them.

 

So Charlie, help me connect the dots. I'm reading the statements above and they don't quite add up.

 

As far as I can see, last week there was a Plan A and a Plan B.

 

Plan A was the new owner is somebody working with us. Aka Team Washington. Plan B was the site dies for any number of reasons.

 

Now we have a different Plan A and Plan B.

 

Plan A is the new owner, after probate, is somebody working with us. Aka Team Washington. Plan B is we move the website to a new server and just continue it. That's actually not really Plan B. It's reality. So Rock Hard over at GayGuides says this is intellectual property theft. I'm not a lawyer, but I think that puts us in a different box than thinking about a hypothetical new owner.

 

It's a little bit like what some guy said this week about "We The People." It's not some abstract thing out there. It's us. Somehow, legally or not, we are the new owner. If that were not the case, the website would be down instead of being on some new server which I'm guessing is in somebody's house.

 

Maybe I'm missing something. Please explain it to me.

 

I've said this twice but I'll be broken record. This rescue from near death is commendable, and I deeply appreciate it. Many of us have said that. In my mind, it underscores the urgency of figuring shit out. In effect, the community took ownership of at least one of these two websites. Were that not the case, you wouldn't be reading this. In my mind, the simple explanation is that this has always been the community's website, anyway. We can't steal our own data. Especially somebody verbose like me. To me, this underscores reasons why a new formal ownership structure should be a community ownership structure.

 

What am I missing? Are we thinking Mark Zuckerberg might be the new owner?

 

If we don't create a form of community ownership, which will take some time, the alternative goes like this. Team Washington becomes the legal executor of Bill's estate. If there is any owner now, other than Bill, it seems like it's @RadioRob. I mischaracterized something someone else said, so I won't try to speak for him. But my understanding is he said he doesn't want to "own" it. Take him out, and I think that leaves @Coolwave35 as the new legal owner. With all due respect to Mark Zuckerberg or Jeff Bezos or any other potential new owners, I think we have a few options. And we did jump the gun on one of them already by moving the data to a new server.

 

I'll say this very bluntly and clearly so I am not mischaracterized. I am deeply grateful for what a few people did that saved this website from possible extinction. I was watching the drama over at Gay Guides without saying a word, believe it or not. A bunch of pessimists were speculating about how it has all very sadly come undone. And in my mind, being an optimist, I had faith that we were going to find a way. And gosh darn it, we did. So I am not criticizing anyone. The opposite. I am deeply grateful.

 

The interesting legal question now is what if Team Washington fails to become Bill's executors, and his estate ends up with the State of Nevada? I'm not a lawyer. But if I follow the legal logic proposed here that means there is no owner, and therefore no website. So somebody better be ready to pull the plug on whatever it is that is allowing me to type this. Because it's not legally ours.

 

To boil it down to its bare essence, either "we" somehow own the site, or it dies. It's that simple.

 

What am I missing?

Edited April 30, 2021 by stevenkesslar

[+ stevenkesslar]

I am concerned that if we get too far ahead of ourselves, enthusiastic members will become too invested in a particular plan; then a new owner may say that he or she is not interested in doing things that way.

 

I hit the "like" button on both of your posts which boil down to the idea above, @Charlie. (Hate to say it, but you were a bit verbose.)

 

I've now seemingly contradicted myself, so let me explain why I think I'm being consistent.

 

If you simply add the word "prospective" to your sentence, we are not getting too far ahead of ourselves. It is where we are at right now.

 

So if the new owner is "us" it means we have to hash this out, which is what a steering committee is for. If the new owner is an individual, it is possible and in fact likely that some "enthusiastic" member could propose something the new owner doesn't like. I have no idea who such an "enthusiastic" member might be. But if such a person exists, let me offer some advice. While Daddy was a kind and compassionate man, it was never a good thing to get on Daddy's bad side. Good boys (Daddy liked to call us his boys) are just that. So most of the time I tried to be a very good boy and do what Daddy told me to do.

 

If a "prospective" new owner, to speak hypothetically, were to say we don't need a steering committee, then creating a steering committee would essentially be creating a train wreck. Just like it would have been when Bill was alive, since I don't think he would have favored the idea based on a number of conversations I had with him. Some "enthusiastic" member might not see it that way. But sober realists like you and me might say we're just building a train wreck. Why do that?

 

So I agree with you. If we're all waiting to find out who the new owner is, because it's not us, it just makes no sense. Let's just wait and see.

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by stevenkesslar

[+ Orin]

What am I missing?

 

I don't want this to turn into a train wreck, so please allow me to make a few points.

 

We, 'Team Washington', as we've been dubbed, have been working to preserve Bill's digital assets, these two sites, as he would have wanted. In order to accomplish that, we first had to convince the hosting company to let us provide payment, so that they didn't go dark. Once that was accomplished, we found that there was another problem: the license for the XenForo engine had expired, ending support and updates. To address that, we would need to upload a file to the site's directory on the server, and that meant getting access to it. Bill had set things up so that it could not be accessed except from his computer, so we asked the hosting company if they could make that possible. Doing this was what caused the first brief outage.

 

But there was a side-effect. During the night, some automated process at the hosting company, which could now access the server as well, updated something that broke the site. @RadioRob attempted to fix the problem, but after a lot of work, concluded that it would be better to port the code and database to a server that he had control of, so he could return it to life. This meant registering this here new domain, and redirecting traffic from the old URL to here. All of this was a work-around, a means to keep this site running.

 

Ownership of the site has not changed as of this time, and 'Team Washington' do not wish to own it. It now has an alias, of sorts. Going forward, assuming ownership is changed, the original domain will still be its primary URL, but the alias will work as well, and it might be easier for people to remember.

 

So we're in a holding pattern here. The state has not yet spoken. We have not gotten the death certificate. Being able to present a clear idea of what the community would like to do with the sites would help whoever it is that decides the disposition of the sites to understand the value of this place to its inhabitants, and to act accordingly.

[+ stevenkesslar]

I don't want this to turn into a train wreck, so please allow me to make a few points.

 

Since that's my language, let me respond. There's no chance of you creating a train wreck. All you and @RadioRob did is create a choice. Had you not created what I'll call an alias site, we wouldn't even have the choice of having this discussion. So thank you. The stuff going on about this in the other forum is, to quote one poster there, "bullshit" in my view. But it is where we are at.

 

Being able to present a clear idea of what the community would like to do with the sites would help whoever it is that decides the disposition of the sites to understand the value of this place to its inhabitants, and to act accordingly.

 

I've thought the same thing you have. Which is that getting our shit together could help matters, not hurt them. That's true whether the new owner is a community ownership entity, or an individual.

 

Not being a lawyer, the most realistic scenario in my mind is that somebody has to explain something to a judge who is very busy and wants a succinct answer. Right out of the gate, as @ArVaGuy thoughtfully pointed out, we know we don't want me doing it. That said, a girl can always dream. So my dream is that if any of this comes up at all what's said is that Bill operated a few "Gay websites" for a community of "Gay men" and these "Gay men" would like to continue operating the "Gay website." And, yes, judge they have a plan to do so, if you'd like a summary. If Long Lost Aunt Bertha shows up that complicates matters. But if we're talking reality this is somewhere in the ballpark, I think. It's a version of what happened the one time a realtor represented me when I was buying a house through probate. I didn't even need to be in a court room.

 

The even better scenario, which may be possible, is that none of this has to be discussed with a judge because it all falls under a small estate exemption. While it was not in Nevada, I also know from personal experience that is a legal possibility. This is speculation rather than fact, but I think the issue of who is the administrator and then whether this falls under a small estate exemption are two legally separate issues. Meaning if Deb or you and/or some local individual are appointed administrator there is at least reason to hope all this falls under the small estate exemption.

 

I think my point still applies. I'll call this the Sleeping Beauty scenario. Bill's website is in a deep sleep, but we are keeping it temporarily alive. If we succeed, we get to kiss it, and it wakes up and we have a happy ending. If we do not succeed, legally we have to kiss Sleeping Beauty goodbye, forever. Somewhere there is a plug, and a server. It will have to be pulled. In real life, as in fairy tales, this one seems like a no brainer to me. It is better to get our shit together.

 

The train wreck is that we can't get our shit together. Or we do it in a way that conflicts with what the new owner wants. If the new owner is us, I'm not even sure what it means for us to conflict with what we want. If the new owner is an individual, it is possible to conflict with what he wants. But to get to any new owner, community or otherwise, we have to deal with the presumed administrator. And that administrator is saying this, to quote directly so I don't mischaracterize anyone again:

 

Being able to present a clear idea of what the community would like to do with the sites would help whoever it is that decides the disposition of the sites to understand the value of this place to its inhabitants, and to act accordingly.

Edited May 1, 2021 by stevenkesslar

[Epigonos]

If this site is to continue operating successfully it will be run, hopefully, by an intelligent, benevolent, and decisive dictator with the assistance of three or possible four moderators. It will never be successfully run by a committee; the very idea is nonsense.

[+ MysticMenace]

How about a poll?

[+ stevenkesslar]

If this site is to continue operating successfully it will be run, hopefully, by an intelligent, benevolent, and decisive dictator with the assistance of three or possibley four moderators.

 

Can I nominate you for the job? I'm too old.

 

Seriously, thank you for weighing in. The silence was deafening.

[john1973]

Steven is really that old? Is he retired?

 

 

 

Can we just all for once admit the truth? I hope in the future I can be a role model of what not to do. Ignorant ***** doesn't even cover it.

 

Since we're revealing things about each other, I know for a fact @Unicorn is known for his empathetic bedside manner. If I got sick, he's obviously the kind of doctor I'd want making me feel better. So him teasing me about what he thinks he knows about my age is way too kind. He's not even discussing my small dick. @latbear4blk, who is a sweetheart, used to always tease me about that. Personally, I think it's a great thing that a small-dicked escort didn't let that stand in the way. Just like it's a great thing when a small-minded poster doesn't let that stand in the way of how he attacks people.

 

But @Unicorn is simply being way too kind. Somehow, despite being a small-dicked ignorant *****, I was financially successful. Then, being essentially ignorant, I made the mistake of investing in real estate instead of drugs. I mean, I deserve as much slack as the next guy. But how many times can a guy fuck up? My own doctor actually felt sorry for me. A few years ago, he asked me how I ended up retiring so early while owning 13 homes. I said, "Isn't it obvious, doc? I'm ignorant, and I have a small dick." I also have dementia. So I may not have said that, exactly. But it was something close.

 

It gets worse. This has been a cruel affliction to my escort buddies. One was getting kicked out of his condo because the owner was selling it. So I bought the condo so he didn't have to move. Such a fucking asshole! I also have legal problems. Once COVID clears I need to find a lawyer who can tell us how I can legally gift the condo to my friend. So basically I'm a super duper asshole. Empathetic guys like @Unicorn would not even treat his dog the way I treat my friends.

 

And let's just paint the grim ending, shall we? Being a smart guy, @Unicorn knows a lot of things. Like my age. He also knows these 22 cunts in Houston who claim to be "professional masseuses" are basically liars and greedy whores leeching money off a person of means. As @Unicorn posted, what is a person of means, such as himself, supposed to do with all these greedy and lying whores trying to leech off people like him? That goes to the core of his compassionate world view. And I have to admit, I'm both jealous and sad. Before I was pathetically old and wretched, I once hoped to be a person of means myself, like @Unicorn. Instead, fate and bad genetics and my addiction to real estate fucked up my life, and made me the wreck that I am. Not even an extremely compassionate doctor like @Unicorn could cure what ails me.

 

So, @Unicorn, please don't feel like you have to be so kind. It's one of the nicest things about you. But I know who I am.

Steven, I love your intellect and eloquence but I'm also interested in your cock.

[lonely_john]

If this site is to continue operating successfully it will be run, hopefully, by an intelligent, benevolent, and decisive dictator with the assistance of three or possible four moderators. It will never be successfully run by a committee; the very idea is nonsense.

Why the word "dictator" keeps popping out on this thread. It's frankly distasteful.

[+ José Soplanucas]

my small dick. @latbear4blk, who is a sweetheart, used to always tease me about that.

 

Small dick? I think it is a big clitoris.

[Lookin]

How about a poll?

 

And Bylaws! We'll definitely need some Bylaws.

 

[+ WilliamM]

To

Why the word "dictator" keeps popping out on this thread. It's frankly distasteful.

Perhaps the word manager is more appropriate.

[+ Coolwave35]

So doesn’t rob have full control of this new domain and site? Problem solved right?

[lonely_john]

Perhaps the word manager is more appropriate.

More appropriate but my point is that there should not be 1 single person making all the decisions, especially if those decisions are going to be made in a capricious and belligerent way. And sorry if I offend anyone with this, but the archaic idea that effective management is achieved only when 1 single person has complete control of everything is complete BS.

[Epigonos]

If anybody here thinks Bill/Daddy ran this site by committee or consensus or consulted posters when making decisions, they are delusional. At best he was a benevolent dictator and often he was an absolute and an arbitrary one. He banned poster at will as well as changing rules. He totally revamped the review site without membership consultation. He was NOT a manager he was a dictator. If this site is to continue there WILL BE 1 single person making all the decisions.

Edited May 1, 2021 by Epigonos

[+ Charlie]

If anybody here thinks Bill/Daddy ran this site by committee or consensus or consulted posters when making decisions, they are delusional. At best he was a benevolent dictator and often he was an absolute and arbitrary one. He banned poster at will as well as changing rules. He totally revamped the review site without membership consultation. He was NOT a manager he was a dictator. If this site is to continue there WILL BE 1 single person making all the decisions.

I agree with what you say about Bill/Daddy/Guy. I don't know whether the final sentence represents what you think is how it should be, or what you assume is inevitable.