Was the thread deleted?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aug 22, 2006
71
5
8
School/Org
New England College of Optometry
City
Rockville
State
MD
I am not an expert at perusing this site, but the thread where we were discussing Adam's banning and my call for an independent audit of CEWire seems to be missing. Was it removed? If so, why?
 
Last edited:
This was my first comment within the thread, started by Adam, and the thread header:

Today I was apparently banned from ODs on Facebook for copying content out of their site a couple of weeks ago —

Adam and ODWire members,

Thank you for the opportunity to address Adam’s message. Before I start, when making your own opinions of what is going on here please work around the “clutter” of who owns what or what infrastructure I chose to run my community on. This noise is irrelevant to the situation at hand and clearly aimed at harming the credibility of my community. This tactic has been used for years on ODWire to discredit my community; clearly a scare tactic generated out of fear that our community might surpass theirs in stature at some point.. The comment about my “real power” is just infantile and I won’t justify it with a response as it is irrelevant to the matter at hand.

I can only speak for myself and the subject matter I posted on and in no way am speaking for Dr. Nelson, as I am about as far away from that drama as I can be and want to be. Adam, your name is not being dragged through the mud by me – not one thing I posted insulted you personally. I have not nor will I ever attack you personally. As a matter of fact our few interactions outside of the forum have been pleasant enough. My posts clearly are calls for transparency, and CEWire related. You hosted a virtual conference and differentiated it from ours with claims of “profits to charity”. Great concept. Subsequently you boasted about having 3,000 attendees. Fantastic success for these things, almost too good to be true….I could only assume based on these numbers and my experience running these conferences that you generated north of $300,000. This figure is based on (1) sign up revenue (2) sponsor revenue and (3) Dr. Silberberg bragging about how you and he made a killing off the conference of a six figure amount to more than two of my industry friends. My figures are not precise and may even be in error, but what other assumptions could I make given the information you and your partner provided? After all, the numbers came right from the horses mouth. It is likely you provided group sign up discounts and even let some attend for free while others paid which would reduce the revenue. Regardless, it appears based on statements of attendance, sponsorships and your associate Dr. Silberberg that it was financially successful. Kudos.

A key strategy for your success was the “profits for charity” angle. Perhaps “profits to charity” was on the up-and-up as I sincerely hope it was, but it is also possible to use “fuzzy accounting” and use the line item of “salaries” to draw as much personal income from the effort while donating a small fraction of the revenues to charity. Whether that did or didn’t occur, when someone claims “profits to charity” it is everyone’s right to have access to an independent audit of the finances. Don’t get me wrong, of course you and whoever are entitled to take a salary, but that salary could be from nickel-and-dime amounts to 90% of the revenues – I’m not accusing you of that, I am just pointing out to those who may not have thought about this that an independent audit is appropriate albeit required. For most charitable organizations this is a matter of course and by saying “all profits to charity” you are indeed claiming “charitable status”, are you not?

Dr. Nelson deleted Dr. Nelson’s post and he admits that. Frankly I would have preferred it stayed up. I do not delete posts that are within guidelines. Your desire and right to defend your self is respected and was welcomed and at no point did I suppress it. You were banned from the community specifically and only for sharing our content outside of the community; this is anathema, and as an experienced community moderator who should know better I was dismayed and shocked that you would stoop to that level. I have never and would never take an image from another community, one that identifies the people who comment, who expect to comment in a secure environment and share it somewhere else. Adam had been a respectful member of our community since the early days and I paid attention to and respected him for that. Your assertion that you were banned for defending yourself has no merit whatsoever.

What I will say about Dr. Nelson is I find it strange that there are so many people here who attack others, including me, that you decided to make an example out of him. I know very little of the story, but I have witnessed some horrific behavior by other members, yet the standards seem to shift with the wind. I am not experienced enough over here to comment any further on this but wish for the sake and sanity of your members to see some consistency in guideline implementation as I have in my community

As far as Adam’s claims of being “attacked” with hostility from “the moderator” there’s more to the story than he would have the reader believe. No attack or comment at any level would ever compel me to copy and share it with my community. A few years ago after seeing some negative comments about my community I reached out to ODWire with an olive branch and suggested we work together, even joined as a “supporting member” with the attitude “the industry’s big enough for both of us; we are different groups serving different needs. I was immediately attacked and accused of things by many people, including your father. This is true genesis of the vitriol. I have never attacked you or anyone else in your forum in your forum or mine and, after this unpleasantness retreated and rarely visited at all. I have not nor will I read all the comments, but anyone is welcomed to have an email discussion or spark up a post in “ODs on facebook” - just not Dr. Silberberg. I’ve been threatened enough for one life by him.
 
Well, then,

787eef91309f13f055c7f3fc2ebaed37.jpg
 
Well, then,

787eef91309f13f055c7f3fc2ebaed37.jpg

So, my community is the one that is quickest to ban and the most censored? There was nothing in what I posted that deserved to be removed. I called for an independent audit - doesn't seem the Farki or Silberberg want it so their answer was to suppress it - delete it. I was called a liar - and when I answered these accusations my answer to this was deleted? How is this right? What does it say about the conference that questioning it's claims of "profits to charity" results in thread deletion. I just came across this lie from Adam - clearly he doesn't understand who is or is not allowed in our community but continues to spew his falsehoods here.

Nelson 9 Farkas.JPG
 
Alan,

In the missing post/thread...it was mentioned that after the last payments are received the audit would prove you incorrect.

"No problem at all. There is nothing to hide.

When you see the balance sheet will you not only apologize but share with us your soliciting vendors to go on your community for a price without telling your members.

Don't bother denying it. We have the names and amount requested. We did not want to make your dirty laundry public because it could impact closing down ODs on Facebook.

Sad that it had to come to this. When you allowed the Nelson diatribe without removing it immediately, you declared war. You are vulnerable not controlling your infrastructure. Now there might be a price to pay.

An audit will happen as soon as the final vendors pay their bill. Then we'll see."


It is challenging following this discussion on two fronts. I hope at some point this will all be resolved and I can continue to enjoy two outstanding...yet different...web sites.
 
Alan,

In the missing post/thread...it was mentioned that after the last payments are received the audit would prove you incorrect.

"No problem at all. There is nothing to hide.

When you see the balance sheet will you not only apologize but share with us your soliciting vendors to go on your community for a price without telling your members.

Don't bother denying it. We have the names and amount requested. We did not want to make your dirty laundry public because it could impact closing down ODs on Facebook.

Sad that it had to come to this. When you allowed the Nelson diatribe without removing it immediately, you declared war. You are vulnerable not controlling your infrastructure. Now there might be a price to pay.

An audit will happen as soon as the final vendors pay their bill. Then we'll see."

It is challenging following this discussion on two fronts. I hope at some point this will all be resolved and I can continue to enjoy two outstanding...yet different...web sites.


Do what you feel compelled to do. I have nothing to apologize for, as independent audits of organizations claiming to "donate profits to charity" are normal course of doing business.

I will, however admit if everything checks out that I was a whiny baby about it.

I have fully disclosed how my community works to my members, and have acted solely within facebooks guidelines - do you think I would have such a large community and not checked with facebook themselves?

You'll see by searching my posts in the group I was in their offices meeting with them last month. That should save you a few headaches.

The only problem I have with this is that you deleted a perfectly acceptable thread that was critical of you. I find it interesting that I am asking for a perfectly reasonable request for a non-profit, and your response is threatening me for something that happened in my community.

I'm sorry you have no control over there. That must really bother you. Deflecting attention from your duty to your attendees towards shutting me down doesn't surprise me or worry me; you should think twice about making threats like that.

I haven't threatened anyone, I have called for transparency.
 
Last edited:
So, my community is the one that is quickest to ban and the most censored? There was nothing in what I posted that deserved to be removed. I called for an independent audit - doesn't seem the Farki or Silberberg want it so their answer was to suppress it - delete it. I was called a liar - and when I answered these accusations my answer to this was deleted? How is this right? What does it say about the conference that questioning it's claims of "profits to charity" results in thread deletion. I just came across this lie from Adam - clearly he doesn't understand who is or is not allowed in our community but continues to spew his falsehoods here.

View attachment 10436

Alan - the thread was deleted because members of this site have told me - loud and clear - that they are sick of this BS and want it to stop. Now. As do I -- this is not a site for cat fights, which is what precipitated this issue in the first place. You retained the ability to post, this should speak volumes as to what we value here.

You obviously have issues with me, with CEwire, and with this site. Please take them up with me, Paul, and even Dr. Silberberg in private, at the AOA or Expo. We will be there for the duration, and would love to talk.

Regards,
Adam
 
Hey @Alan Glazier OD FAAO . The post was removed. I checked your personal postings and the last ones are from April 2015 and then this thread.

Reasoning: I do not know. If I had to guess, we probably want to move away from this topic and let it be forgotten. I would lock this current thread if I had the power to do so (but I only have that in Non-Optometric).

I hope that my response suffices enough.
 
Adam, I will be happy to meet with you. During my last meeting with Silberberg he physically threatened me; would prefer not to be close to that loose cannon
 
Adam, I will be happy to meet with you. During my last meeting with Silberberg he physically threatened me; would prefer not to be close to that loose cannon
oy vey! just me then, i'm as threatening as a pillow full of tribbles... i'll be there literally the whole time, i'm sure we'll cross paths.

locking this thread, as Doug suggested, as it has outlived its usefulness
 
Status
Not open for further replies.