[cabo35]

Originally Posted by nitakk

Cabo, you must truly be a renaissance man. To come up with another lenthy post, complete with research - and play 18 holes and a movie. I suspect a little help has come your way, perhaps it's Mrs. Cabo? I only played nine on an executive and had too little time to be so verbose and witty.

Mrs. Cabo appreciates the honorable mention you gave her, but, she has distinguished herself without need to coat tail my excursions and dalliances into the dynamics of human nature. She has a masters plus thirty in Education Administration with the thirty coming in Learning Disabilities and Exceptional Children. Mrs. Cabo has been a licensed pilot since 1980. She also was two pounds off the Florida State record for blackfin tuna. We both enjoy riding our Harley throughout the Villages and Central Florida. Mrs. Cabo crews with me when we fish the Northeast bluewater canyons from NJ to Hatteras in our sportfisherman. We annually chase tune, marlin and other pelagic species as well as rare denizens of the deep. She's also a 22 handicap golfer but working on her game. She has ridden in a NASCAR race car at 170 mph. She was 64 and a perfect size 4 when she crossed that off her bucket list. She really looked cute in that fireproof suit and helmet. She is a much better writer then I am but doesn't give me the "help" you suspect. Is that enough Renaissance for now?

I digress. Perhaps you can cite the part where Morse attacks "the credibility of Ritchie and the Sentinel with well-placed and timed articles". I missed that. The blog article in my post had nothing to do with Morse or The Villages. You seem to be mixing up Morse with the blog. I believe I cited the fragile suspect integrity of the blog article quite clearly. In that regard we are redundant.

We are in complete agreement about the dearth of balanced, objective reporting available to Villagers.

Thank you for asking about Mrs. Cabo. Have a good evening.

[Larry Wilson]

It's one's own filter that gives meaning to a post. There is always many sides to every story. I sure hope Shadow isn't banned.

[Taj44]

Originally Posted by LeeAndDottie

You say "It appears to me that the Morse family is contributing the land and construction." I don't think you can call it a contribution when the developer builds a building then rents it out to the future occupant (Moffitt). Sounds like it is one heck of a lucrative business deal. The developer still owns the land and the building.

You got that right!

[Taj44]

Originally Posted by Larry Wilson

It's one's own filter that gives meaning to a post. There is always many sides to every story. I sure hope Shadow isn't banned.

Nicely put Larry. I too hope the Shadow continues to post.

[graciegirl]

..

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by nitakk

Several days ago, I saw a posting from The Shadow that was less than flattering to Morse. Within 15 minutes, the posting was deleted by administration of the site and The Shadow has not been seen nor heard from since. Personally, I don't think the remarks Shadow made were any more inflammatory than some I have seen - perhaps it was the target of his remarks that got him deleted.

This site has no connection to the owners of The Villages. This site is privately owned. The owners of this site make their own determination about the posts here.

If, in their opinion, you go too far, your posts will be removed and if you continue, you will be removed.

I am glad they protect us.

[chocolata]

Well done, Cabo.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

This site has no connection to the owners of The Villages. This site is privately owned. The owners of this site make their own determination about the posts here.

If, in their opinion, you go too far, your posts will be removed and if you continue, you will be removed.

I am glad they protect us.

Despite the temptation to do otherwise, I have tried to refrain from personal criticism. However, just out of curiosity does anybody know what the standards of the administrators are for removal of posts and members are? Do the standards apply only to criticism of the Morse family or do they also apply to criticism of others, like, for example, Lauren Ritchie? Because both are public figures, in the interests of a vigorous debate, I would hope that posters would have a fair amount of latitude in expressing their opinions and that the Morse family would not get special treatment.

[JimJoe]

what happened to shadow?
I liked him.
JJ

[tony]

This is the first time I ever heard of the Morse family getting special treatment here. i certainly don't give the family any.

Nobody is gone for criticizing the Morses here, either, nor for criticizing Lauren Ritchie.

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by tony

this is the first time i ever heard of the morse family getting special treatment here. I certainly don't give the family any.

Nobody is gone for criticizing the morses here, either, nor for criticizing lauren ritchie.

yes!!!!!

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by LeeAndDottie

You say "It appears to me that the Morse family is contributing the land and construction." I don't think you can call it a contribution when the developer builds a building then rents it out to the future occupant (Moffitt). Sounds like it is one heck of a lucrative business deal. The developer still owns the land and the building.

Yeah. The Daily Sun sure made it appear that the Developer was making a contribution, when in fact, it was an investment.

The question that I still have is what the deal is between Moffitt and the developer regarding the Developer's fund-raising campaign for Moffitt. Maybe everything is above-board and truly arm's length. Maybe not. Certainly the Developer has some skin in the game, at the very least.

I struck out (not to my surprise, I will admit) with my request to the Moffitt Center for the details about its arrangements with the Developer. However, a little transparency would be nice since Moffitt is asking for our donations. Certainly, the misrepresentations in the Daily Sun and the Developer's attempt to shake down the American Cancer Society / Relay for Life certainly should cause one to be a little suspicious about what is going on.

In commenting on the subject, one should keep in mind that the controversy is not about whether Moffitt should come here. The controversy arises as a result of the Developer-backed fund-raising drive and the tactics used to raise those funds. If Moffitt, using its own funds, were simply going to establish an office here, hire one radiologist, and rent from the Developer, we wouldn't have Lauren Ritchie articles and a hundred or so posts in this Forum.

[ajakk]

Originally Posted by tony

This is the first time I ever heard of the Morse family getting special treatment here. i certainly don't give the family any.

Nobody is gone for criticizing the Morses here, either, nor for criticizing Lauren Ritchie.

Tony, I read the Shadow's post and saw the red kettle. I immediately tried to post a reply, quoting the Shadow in my post. Not only was my post never put on the board, but the Shadow was deleted by the time I finished. Having seen the post in question, I did not find it offensive or inflammatory. It was just the Shadow's opinion about Morse and his ethics. It was no worse than what has been said about Lauren Ritchie in this thread.

[same]

[QUOTE=Advogado;330860]Yeah. The Daily Sun sure made it appear that the Developer was making a contribution, when in fact, it was an investment.

The question that I still have is what the deal is between Moffitt and the developer regarding the Developer's fund-raising campaign for Moffitt. Maybe everything is above-board and truly arm's length. Maybe not. Certainly the Developer has some skin in the game, at the very least.

I struck out (not to my surprise, I will admit) with my request to the Moffitt Center for the details about its arrangements with the Developer. However, a little transparency would be nice since Moffitt is asking for our donations. Certainly, the misrepresentations in the Daily Sun and the Developer's attempt to shake down the American Cancer Society / Relay for Life certainly should cause one to be a little suspicious about what is going on.

In commenting on the subject, one should keep in mind that the controversy is not about whether Moffitt should come here. The controversy arises as a result of the Developer-backed fund-raising drive and the tactics used to raise those funds. If Moffitt, using its own funds, were simply going to establish an office here, hire one radiologist, and rent from the Developer, we wouldn't have Lauren Ritchie articles and a hundred or so posts in this Forum.[/QUOTE

From Wikipedia: The society’s allocation of funds for the fiscal year ending August 31, 2005 lists 70% of funds for Program Services (Research 14%, Prevention 20%, Patient Support 20%, Detection and Treatment 16%). The remaining 30% are allocated for supporting services (Fundraising 22%, and Management, General administration 8%) meeting the Better Business Bureau's Standards for Charity Accountability (At least 65% to program services and no more than 35% to overhead and fundraising expenses).[7]

Should "relay" pay the ACS 30% of the funds raised in The Villages: with the donations not going here?

[barb1191]

[quote=same;330864]

Originally Posted by Advogado

.

I struck out (not to my surprise, I will admit) with my request to the Moffitt Center for the details about its arrangements with the Developer. However, a little transparency would be nice since Moffitt is asking for our donations. Certainly, the misrepresentations in the Daily Sun and the Developer's attempt to shake down the American Cancer Society / Relay for Life certainly should cause one to be a little suspicious about what is going on.

Clarification: Moffitt is NOT "asking for our donations" as you mentioned above. It's the developer's health organization who are asking for donations to the fund they own and control, and in turn, the developer will own all of the medical apparatus that you paid for and is housed in the building that the developer will be leasing to Moffitt. Your donations are paying for equipment that the developer will own and profit from it's use. Moffitt will own NOTHING on the Sharon Morse site for Moffitt.