Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2002 05:28:00 -0400
Subject: Re: PUPT: don't usually do this, but
From: Christopher Hudert <heyhoot-AT-mindspring.com>


on 8/3/02 6:21 PM, mark segal at segalpuppets-AT-comcast.net wrote:

> Dear Puppethead,
> 
> Don't know who you are since you don't sign your name.....


Dang it Marc, you beat me too it. Actually, you didn't, but the reply I
posted from the road (re: his post about the Puppetry Store) seems not to
have made it from my lap top to the crit list. Guess I gotta haul out the
laptop and see if other emails are lingering there waiting to be sent. I'll
sum up my previous reply:

YO, PUPPETHEAD - 
 Who are you and why are you so angry? You criticize the PofA store and
Board using the third person as if you were so damn important that everyone
should know who you are and agree with you regardless of their own opinion.
Yes, you posted last year that the store was having troubles and that
perhaps it should be examined as to whether it was and is still a viable
venture. It is my understanding that was happening prior to your post and is
happening now. So sorry that it was not immediately shut down because
PUPPETHEAD thought it should be. Even if most people agreed with you (and
apparently they did not and do not), like it or not, there are procedures
that must be followed. If you take the time to look in your PofA manual you
will find them.
 If you have ever been on a board, at least here in the US, you would know
that the meetings are usually, if not always, open. Just because they are
not attended by many members outside of the board, or that do not have
immediate business with the board, does not make them secret, as you so
venomately imply. (The times, dates, and place of most PofA board meetings
are available to the membership.) Strangely enough it is also the duty of
any board, not just the PofA board, to communicate between themselves and
make inquiries, sometimes discreetly, about issues that are current. (That's
how they get their jobs done. That and "secret" meetings with their
committees.) The store would certianly fall into this catagory. This too
does not make for a secret meeting.
 You also write "What PUPPETHEAD has learned:..." as though you either were
a so called investigative reporter/gossip columnist (do you also write for
the National Enquirer or World News?), had an inside tract to a board
member, or both. So????? BTW, if you (and others, like the entire
membership) knew that, and I quote you now, "Secret meetings... are being
held this summer at Regional Festivals... amongst the POA leaders and
assorted elite leaders..." how could they be secret? Doesn't the fact that
everyone knows about them make them not secret? Are you upset that you don't
know what is said at the meeting and by whom? Go check the minutes of the
meeting, they are public record. Upset that the board doesn't always act
fast enough (or to your liking)? Join the club. Somethings take time. And
you can't please all of the people all of the time. No one, not even the
board, likes everything that is done. It is something called majority rule.
 I'm sorry that you feel so embarrassed by the actions of store and the
board. Perhaps next election you will go through the process of having
yourself nominated (the procedure for this is in your manual, too) to run
for the board and then -if elected- you can serve and attempt to straighten
out the board, the store, and the PofA all to your liking. But I'll let YOU
in on a little secret... don't be too surprised if you find yourself
somewhat blocked by the democratic process of the organization. Even a board
can't do some things it would like to if the members vote against it.


Now as to your recent post, PUPPETHEAD, perhaps you don't realize it but
your post(s) come across every bit as arrogant (why the self important bold
and caps?), or more so, than the post you bemoan. This is after all a public
forum where people can post their opinions then others agree, disagree, or
ignore. What a wonderful world. Mr. Smyte expressed disappointed that more
people didn't reply to a post he found interesting. While I often don't
agree with Robert on some things, I do enjoy reading his opinion then
discussing and debating things with him both publicly, as in this forum, and
secretly -oops, I mean privately. While I don't give a rat's behind for a
Mamet discussion (unless it is to get your dander up, Robert), I do agree
that we go round and round on some topics. If you recall the original post
even started out with an appology because the writer recalled that the
subject (black/curtian of light theater) had been discussed ad nauseum but
he couldn't find his notes. He could have checked the archives, and maybe he
did, but he put up a new post that generated some new material on a well
worn subject. No big deal. Nor was Roberts post a big deal. Read it, reply,
ignore, or delete. It's not that hard.

 Finally, my wish for you PUPPETHEAD, is that you find the courage to sign
your posts in an identifable manner and learn to lighten up. You'll live a
longer happier life if you do.
 Well, okay, signing your posts in an identifiable manner won't help you
live a longer happier life, but lightening up will.

Christopher




  --- Personal replies to: Christopher Hudert <heyhoot-AT-mindspring.com>
  --- List replies to:     puptcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  --- Admin commands to:   majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  --- Archives at:         http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons