ACA is shutting down

[mdd]

Posted by Rich this morning:

Decision has been made. No need to wait until Nov 1. The American Canyoneering Association is going away completely. If someone wants to start a new association, more power to them. If they do, I will send out a notice to everyone on our email list to inform them about the new association and let them decide if they want to join.


http://www.canyoneering.net/forums/showthread.php?4870-ACA-Needs-a-New-Owner&p=28907#post28907

[tanya]

This is probably a good choice Rich. You can be free to be happy and live your life while others have the choice, to start an organization - if they want to put the time, money, effort and such into it. Few will ever do that like you did.

[restrac2000]

Shocked to read that this morning, myself. Was always one of the options out there but not necessarily the one I was advocating. Obviously most of us didn't have direct influence over that decision.

Anybody familiar with Nevada incorporation? What is the legal status of a company previously incorporated as a "domestic non-profit" that continued to operate 2 years after its status was revoked? What affect does that have on the legal "dissolution" of the organization? Are they still required to donate all remaining funds to another IRS recognized non-profit? What are the legal limitations of the other assets (especially the subscriber list)?

Phillip

[jman]

Safe to assume
that will mean terminating the website and forum as well? Bogley might have a influx of new members soon.

[CarpeyBiggs]

Safe to assume
that will mean terminating the website and forum as well? Bogley might have a influx of new members soon.

highly doubtful. my bet is it means the ACA is now becoming canyons and crags. heaven forbid the ACA forum becomes "the swamp 2" :roflol: (on the ACA forum, the "swamp" is a nickname for bogley, i believe. i've heard more than a few folks call it that)

[tanya]

:angryfire: How insulting!

[restrac2000]

The "Swamp 2" comment?

[accadacca]

Mud bogging over here on Bogley. However, it does seem like most of the mud slinging goes on over there, but we do have our moments. :lol8:
Bogley has been online for nearly 7 years and we are growing stronger every year. We ain't going nowhere! :stud:

[tanya]

The "Swamp 2" comment?

(on the ACA forum, the "swamp" is a nickname for bogley, i believe. i've heard more than a few folks call it that)

Swamp????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angry fire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:: angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryf ire::angryfire:




:facepalm1:




:wedgie::chairshot::bash::kicknuts::bs::frustrated ::argue:

[Iceaxe]

I searched the ACA forum with the key word "swamp" and there is only one hit:

Rich (responding to possible ACA options): Move these forums to canyonsandcrags and make them the Canyons & Crags Forums.

Back of Beyond: I like this option, I would hate to see this forum turn into "The Swamp 2"

So I can't see how that is a direct reference to Bogley unless it was also used in a conversation or post outside the forum.

:cool2:

[CarpeyBiggs]

I searched the ACA forum with the key word "swamp" and there is only one hit:

Rich (responding to possible ACA options): Move these forums to canyonsandcrags and make them the Canyons & Crags Forums.

Back of Beyond: I like this option, I would hate to see this forum turn into "The Swamp 2"

So I can't see how that is a direct reference to Bogley unless it was also used in a conversation or post outside the forum.

:cool2:

yes, it is a reference i've heard from a handful of canyoneers in actual conversation, and so i assume that is what james is referencing on the ACA site. but like i said, he could be referencing something else and it's just coincidence, but it is a common reference from the "non-bogley" canyoneering crowd... i reserve the right to be wrong though. :haha:

[oldno7]

At least this "swamp" is growing like crazy and doesn't resemble a ghost town with a few old codgers on the porch, pretending life was better in the ol' days, like Rich's site.

Hate to post this in the canyoneering section, but---THERES A WHOLE LOT MORE TO LIFE THAN CANYONEERING.

Canyoneering is only one aspect, for those who it is everything,:ne_nau:

[mdd]

Wasn't the swamp the cool tent to hang out in in the movie/tv show MASH?

M

[Don]

Wasn't the swamp the cool tent to hang out in in the movie/tv show MASH?

M

Yeah, MASH reference; the swamp was the cool place to be. The tent with the homemade distillery. That sounds a lot like Bogley to me. :haha:

[Scott Card]

The tent with the homemade distillery. That sounds a lot like Bogley to me.
Crap, Don. What does that make me? Frank Burns? :facepalm1: Maybe I can be Charles... Nah, that's not me either. Wait, I want to be Col. Potter. :haha:

[Skylinerider]

Crap, Don. What does that make me? Frank Burns? :facepalm1: Maybe I can be Charles... Nah, that's not me either. Wait, I want to be Col. Potter. :haha:

I think that makes you Radar. Grape Nehi anyone?

[Scott Card]

I think that makes you Radar. Grape Nehi anyone?

:lol8: Except I don't particularly like animals and I lost my teddy bear a few decades ago. :haha:

[moab mark]

Back to the regularly scheduled programing, has a date been tossed out when the ACA site is going away?

[tanya]

:lol8: I lost my teddy bear a few decades ago. :haha:


I am sorry :haha:

[Iceaxe]

48784

[Iceaxe]

Back to the regularly scheduled programing, has a date been tossed out when the ACA site is going away?

I'm still waiting for Rich to announce his exciting grand new plan that instantly makes everything else obsolete.... but really just white washes over the same old dry rot.

That has always been his past M.O.

As I've said before "I'll believe it when they are changing the nameplates on the office doors and repainting the executive parking spots at the ACA office complex...."

Rich has quit so many times in the past that I have now lost count, its up to at least a half dozen or more.

[ratagonia]

Back to the topic at hand? I just posted these two posts at the ACA Forum - thought it would be a good idea to also archive them here:

Post #1:




Originally Posted by rcwild
It is time for me to leave.

If you haven't heard, I screwed up and let the ACA corporate filings expire. Notices were sent to an old PO box and were never received. It would be simple enough to remedy; pay the past due filing fees and late fees. But the situation has provided an opportunity for me to do some soul searching. The ACA now is nothing like I originally envisioned. Unlikely it will ever reach its full potential without some new blood.

The ACA exists in name only now and with this website. I intend to give it to someone who can come up with a good plan for it in the future. Post in this thread what YOU will do with it. Share your vision with others and be willing to follow through with that vision.

On November 1st, I will post a poll so everyone can vote on their favorite plan for the future. I will give this website and the rights to the name to the person who receives the most votes. They can take it from there.

May I point out, Rich, that you made a commitment to the community.

I support you in keeping your commitments.

I request that you relinquish your cop-out, and return to this original commitment.

Sincerely,
Tom

Post #2:



RCWILD said: "The ACA exists in name only now and with this website. I intend to give it to someone who can come up with a good plan for it in the future. Post in this thread what YOU will do with it. Share your vision with others and be willing to follow through with that vision."

Rich asked for people to propose plans, and few have. Perhaps the following proposal will stimulate some proposals.

Ratagonia Plan #1 for transition of the ACA to a membership-owned and operated organization.

A. On Nov 1st, Rich will identify the top 50 posters on the ACA Canyoneering.net forum.

B. The new interim Board of Directors (iBOD) will consist of all of the top 50 posters who choose to serve, excluding the following individuals: Rich Carlson, Tom Jones. Rich will send an invitation to the top 50 posters (less exclusions) to join the interim BOD. Those who accept the invitation by November 10th (inclusive) will have their emails forwarded to all acceptors. The first acceptor shall operate as Chairman until a Chairman can be elected.

C. Should less than 10 posters choose to participate by Nov 10th, invitations will be extended again to the non-acceptors, and to the next 20 top posters, for another 10 days. This will continue until an interim board of at least 10 individuals has agreed to participate.

D. The Interim Board will elect by simple majority a Chairman at the earliest opportunity. Each iBOD member will have one vote. The iBOD will set rules for itself, and publish minutes of meetings on Canyoneering.net.

E. The Mission Statement of the (new) ACA is proposed as:

E1. The ACA is a membership-owned, membership-governed non-profit Association who's purpose is to serve the Canyoneering Community.

F. The Goals of the Interim Board of Directors are proposed as follows:

F1. Create and operate a fair, open and democratic process for the membership to elect a founding Board of Directors of the new ACA, on or before April 1, 2012.

G. Membership in the ACA is frozen as of Oct 11, 2011. All members of the ACA as of Oct 11, 2011 are members of the new ACA.

H. At the time the Interim Board is seated, Rich Carlson will turn over Assets of the ACA to the Interim Board, consisting of, at least, the following:

H1. By quitclaim deed, the name "American Canyoneering Association" and all rights thereto, legal and otherwise.
H2. As in H1, the ACA Logo.
H3. A list of members as of Oct 11, 2011, in a usable electronic format, as best can be determined.
H4. The website canyoneering.net intact, with all content in place as of Oct 10, 2011. "The website" means domain hosting information and website host information including passwords. Rich Carlson will continue current DNS and Hosting services through Jan 31st, 2012, for which he will be paid $100.00 by an anonymous donor. On Nov 1, 2011, Rich will send Website information to James Kip Marshall to hold in trust for the iBOD of the new ACA. Passwords will be changed upon receipt of the information. The Trustee will hold the information in Trust until election of a new Board of Directors (past the iBod) is complete.
H5. A Bill of Sale indicating the sale of these assets, and whatever other assets the iBod chooses to accept before Jan 1, 2012, for the price of $10.00 (to be provided by an anonymous donor).

I. Should the iBod not hold elections on or before April 1st, 2012, the iBod will immediately lose authority, and authority will relinquish to a Board of Directors drawn from the following list of individuals, who choose to serve: Sonny Lawrence, Charly Oliver, Hank Moon, James Kip Marshall, Bo Beck, Michael Dallin, Steve Ramras, Rich Rudow, Todd Martin, Scott Card and four ACA members selected by Sonny Lawrence (excluding Tom Jones and Rich Carlson). The second interim Board of Directors (iBOD2) will accept the same charge as the first, and seek to hold elections by July 1st 2012. Should they fail to do so, all assets of the ACA will revert to Rich Carlson.

Thank you for your consideration.

Tom Jones
ACA Life Member

[restrac2000]

For the scheduled programing:

Rich/ACA has thus far has failed to present specifics about the future.
The Emperor has an offer with greater detail on the canyoneering.net forum

Phillip

[ratagonia]

I'm still waiting for Rich to announce his exciting grand new plan that instantly makes everything else obsolete.... but really just white washes over the same old dry rot.

That has always been his past M.O.

As I've said before "I'll believe it when they are changing the nameplates on the office doors and repainting the executive parking spots at the ACA office complex...."

Rich has quit so many times in the past that I have now lost count -- it's up to at least a half dozen.

Support. T

[tanya]

That's a good plan, but why exclude yourself Tom?

[ratagonia]

That's a good plan, but why exclude yourself Tom?

1. I do not have the time or interest.
2. Including myself in the process may make it indigestible to numerous ACA members.

T :moses:

[CarpeyBiggs]

<mod hat on>

bogley pronunciation discussion has now been split off into a thread in general discussion - i'll try to keep this one on topic now that it has some pretty important information in it, and i imagine discussion will follow... thanks.
http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?60917-How-To-Bogley-Pronunciation

</hat off>

[restrac2000]

The current ACA situation is quite ugly and difficult to analyze for a layman like myself. A couple issues and questions to those in the know or invested in a different outcome:

1) How does one obtain the bylaws of a domestic non-profit association? They are not registered or available through the state of Nevada. The state was also not allowed to help with regulatory information. Hard to know what our rights and privileges are without the bylaws. None are found in the various internet archives currently available.


2) What happens to a domestic nonprofit corporation that is revoked due to failure to comply with the law? By Nevada law they are not legally a sole-proprietor. They hinted at the fact that such a business is basically operating without a license. Is that true and, if so, how did the ACA operate since 2009? Seems problematic if such an organization simply becomes the property of the director.

3) For those curious: Rich and Judy Carlson are the sole officers listed on the corporate non-profit paperwork dating back 2002-2008. Not what I expected.

More to follow.

Phillip

[ratagonia]

The current ACA situation is quite ugly and difficult to analyze for a layman like myself. A couple issues and questions to those in the know or invested in a different outcome:

1) How does one obtain the bylaws of a domestic non-profit association? They are not registered or available through the state of Nevada. The state was also not allowed to help with regulatory information. Hard to know what our rights and privileges are without the bylaws. None are found in the various internet archives currently available.


2) What happens to a domestic nonprofit corporation that is revoked due to failure to comply with the law? By Nevada law they are not legally a sole-proprietor. They hinted at the fact that such a business is basically operating without a license. Is that true and, if so, how did the ACA operate since 2009? Seems problematic if such an organization simply becomes the property of the director.

3) For those curious: Rich and Judy Carlson are the sole officers listed on the corporate non-profit paperwork dating back 2002-2008. Not what I expected.

More to follow.

Phillip

There are many ways in which a business/corporation/proprietorship/association are licensed. The filing with the Secretary of State/Dept of Commerce to create the entity is important. Updating and paying the annual dues are much less important.

You write to the registered address of the entity, and request a copy of the bylaws. For your purposes, you might want to do so by registered mail. Give a reasonable period of time, then complain to the Dept of Corporations in Nevada that you are unable to obtain bylaws, even though you are a member. Then complain to the Atty Gen of Utah that this organization is operating in the State of Utah but is no longer a registered entity.

Tom

[restrac2000]

In the process of the official request from the ACA. Mostly to educate myself in more detail. Will be interesting to see how Rich defined "member" back in 2002-2003.

Not likely to affect the short-term decision making. I still think offers/ideas like you presented are better than Rich's attempt to sink the ship (I always thought the captain went down with the ship, not the other way around). Nonetheless, I guess the problems I based the last 6 weeks of interaction on don't exist if the ACA goes under.

Would be nice to see Rich stick to his published words this time though.

Phillip

Edit: The problems still exist if any element of the "ACA" remains, such as certifications and accreditations.

[Iceaxe]

If Rich wants to just let the ACA die I have no problem with that... It's probably for the best in the long term. So long as it's not like one of those damn zombie movies where it keeps rising from the dead.

Rich did offer his mailing lists to anyone wanting to start a future organization. The website content and forum might have some value, but I expect those to migrate to his Canyons and Crags business in one form or anther.

Bottom-line, if Rich wants to retire the ACA in a quite, dignified manner he has my full support. If people are going to insist on an election I'll be happy to submit "retire the ACA with dignity as an option".

[restrac2000]

Rich just erased Tom's comments on canyoneering.net

[restrac2000]

Rich @ canyoneering.net: Forums will continue, Kyle.

The American Canyoneering Association is going away. Replacing it with the American Canyoneering Academy. Perhaps now people will understand the mission is TRAINING, not politics.

Pathetic outcome. To rephrase someone else: same story, different book.

Rich just likes control. Wonder how people tolerate his breakdowns on the internet? Its like a bad version of Ground Hogs Day, without Bill Murray, the groundhog or any comedy.

Phillip

[CarpeyBiggs]

Rich just erased Tom's comments on canyoneering.net

what an absolute stunner! :facepalm1:

[restrac2000]

Rich is a busy reactionary, from the ACA site:

"The American Canyoneering Academy (formerly the American Canyoneering Association) is the premier source for training, technical forums and services for recreational canyoneers, canyon leaders, guides and rescue professionals in the United States, Canada and Latin America."

[mdd]

Pathetic outcome. To rephrase someone else: same story, different book.

Rich just likes control. Wonder how people tolerate his breakdowns on the internet? Its like a bad version of Ground Hogs Day, without Bill Murray, the groundhog or any comedy.

Phillip


Bwahahahaha, see you all in a few months when we go through Rich's "I quit!" exercise again! The drama shall never die!

M

PS - oh yeah, this changes nothing, Phillip's questions remain valid, and is the American Canyoneering Academy still going to host rendezvous and other non-training related functions?

[Iceaxe]

I'm still waiting for Rich to announce his exciting grand new plan that instantly makes everything else obsolete.... but really just white washes over the same old dry rot.

Dang.... I should pack up my crystal ball and head to Vegas this weekend.... I can read the cards before they are even dealt. :lol8:




The American Canyoneering Association is going away. Replacing it with the American Canyoneering Academy. Perhaps now people will understand the mission is TRAINING, not politics.

Does anyone actually believe there is a chance in hell that the "new and improved" ACA will just train and stay out of politics?

:cool2:

[ratagonia]

Rich just erased Tom's comments on canyoneering.net

Oh, and removed me as a Forum participant.

Oh well.

T

[restrac2000]

Dang.... I should pack up my crystal ball and head to Vegas this weekend.... I can read the cards before they are even dealt. :lol8:




Does anyone actually believe there is a chance in hell that the "new and improved" ACA will just train and stay out of politics?

:cool2:

Yeah, definitely better at predicting outcomes than I. Add naive to all the various names I have earned the last 6 weeks.

A BOD could diffuse Rich's biases but I don't see that happening. The broader social implications of "fraud" seem a good summation of the ACAs past and likely future.

Ultimately it boils down to Rich being unwilling to truly change and understand the broad implication of "politics".

So it is. Sorry to drag so many folks down into the mud for what appears to be a clone of the past. Sorry to have supported the ACA for so long. Being hopeful and naive can be a dangerous combination.

I will write a few letters of complaint were they may be valuable and leave at that for a while. There are other options but luckily a friend reminded me that those are "mean". No need for me to intentionally go there.

Phillip

[restrac2000]

Oh, and removed me as a Forum participant.

Oh well.

T

Welcome to the club. Unfortunately it has a membership fee as well ;^)

Phillip

[restrac2000]

Next time any of ya'll wanna swing by the happening night life of Cedar the first round is on me. :beer:

Phillip

[trackrunner]

Pathetic outcome. To rephrase someone else: same story, different book.

Rich just likes control. Wonder how people tolerate his breakdowns on the internet? Its like a bad version of Ground Hogs Day, without Bill Murray, the groundhog or any comedy.

Phillip


Rich is a busy reactionary, from the ACA site:

"The American Canyoneering Academy (formerly the American Canyoneering Association) is the premier source for training, technical forums and services for recreational canyoneers, canyon leaders, guides and rescue professionals in the United States, Canada and Latin America."

sorry I'm lost please fill me in. Isn't this what you mostly wanted from Rich. To keep teaching/training and doing his private business but not using "association" name.

[restrac2000]

Kinda. He is taking the forum and member list with him from an association he perpetuated in an unethical manner. Not sure of the legalities of that as he never published his bylaws to his members.

Two different outcomes:
1) Rich operates Canyons and Crags as a sole proprietor with his own clients, not the ACAs
2) Rich just changes the names of the ACA but keeps all the ill-gotten gains of war.

You are right, the the name did change. But there are still underlying ethical problems of how, to what degree and how the change affects the professional and recreational community.

Scott Card was the one who summarized my idea as solely about a "name". I have adamantly disagreed with that simplification.

So it goes.

Phillip....Whiny Bitch out for the day.

[ratagonia]

sorry I'm lost please fill me in. Isn't this what you mostly wanted from Rich. To keep teaching/training and doing his private business but not using "association" name.

Nope.

Just once, I wanted Rich to be true to his word. I think the ACA serves the community, however based on a fraudulent premise, and I want the value the ACA holds to persist into the future, AS RICH PROMISED.

That's all.

Tom

[trackrunner]

2) Rich just changes the names of the ACA but keeps all the ill-gotten gains of war.

You are right, the the name did change. But there are still underlying ethical problems of how, to what degree and how the change affects the professional and recreational community.

Thanks for the reply I understand your point. Had it operated as an "Academy" from the begging would you have been OK with that (the forums, training, certification, rendezvous)? Curious to know if a sole proprietorship academy from the begging would have been more accurate in your opinion as to how this former association was being run.

[Iceaxe]

sorry I'm lost please fill me in. Isn't this what you mostly wanted from Rich. To keep teaching/training and doing his private business but not using "association" name.

Please don't get lost in the smoke and mirrors..... or distracted by the dog and pony.....

Rich has just tried to side-stepped a promise he made to the canyoneering community. Which was to relinquish control of the ACA and let the community vote on the future direction of the organization.....

BUT.... Rich has basically just told you his promise isn't worth crap and you can go screw yourself.

This has nothing to do with a school as a private business. If Rich really wants to "just teach" than turn over the keys to the ACA as promised and go teach!


:cool2:

[trackrunner]

Nope.

Just once, I wanted Rich to be true to his word. I think the ACA serves the community, however based on a fraudulent premise, and I want the value the ACA holds to persist into the future, AS RICH PROMISED.

That's all.

Tom

I can see how you and others would want a member driven association to come out of this. Was kind of promised with a new owner. I agree with you that there was still value in association going forward. I'd still like a member access advocacy association.

would you or others strongly in this debate be OK with the forums and most of his technical knowledge contributions to the forums transitioning to his private business or should that be property of a the association continuing forward.

I had saw Rich's post about how he wished/thought about calling it an acadamey from the beginning. I thought that was a reasonable solution to keep doing his private business as he wanted.

[trackrunner]

Next time any of ya'll wanna swing by the happening night life of Cedar the first round is on me. :beer:

Phillip

I always swing through town. I'll be sure to hit up and chat next time.

[oldno7]

Let me enlighten al, ya'alls......

Profile of the Sociopath




Glibness and Superficial Charm

Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.

Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."

Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.

Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.

Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.



Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.

Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.



Irresponsibility/Unreliability
Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.



Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.

Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.

[accadacca]

Dang! I was hoping to see the ACA ultimatum reach it's November 1st deadline. I've enjoyed reading all the topics and posts...great dialog.

[tanya]

If you have ever known a sociopath you would not make light of it. Rich is overemotional, and is not a sociopath. Alcohol probably adds to the emotion when on the computer/net too.

But if you were talking the Emperor, it does fit better. :mrgreen:

(just joking Tom)

[restrac2000]

I didn't interpret OldNo7's comment as making light of the diagnosis. First, its obvious none of us can truly "diagnose" such things. Second, the irony of the sociopath diagnosis is that most true sociopaths will never be diagnosed because therapy/appraisal is optional.

However, it is fair to recognize how certain trends in Rich's behavior with the "ACA" fit into categories. I don't truly know what Rich's behavior may be classified as, heck, most of the time I don't understand the nature of my own. Nonetheless, I can say there are trends in Rich's public interactions (during his ACA tenure):

1)"Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims."
Multiple people who "befriended" Rich can attest to this outcome.

2) "They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible."
How often does Rich engage threads? How quickly has eliminated he ACA life members from the ACA forum recently, despite well-defined forum rules? Are canyoneers really like "herding cats"? How many times in this 6 week period has Rich justified the behavior and structure of the association based solely on his desires?

3) "They may dominate and humiliate their victims."
Self explanatory.....just look up Piss Ant thread on canyoneering.net

4) "Outraged by insignificant matters"
This entire series of thread started because a poster who was paying a compliment to the ACA happened to mention he didn't agree with everything the ACA did. 95% of the words were praise, 5% were neutral and actually context to how new the praise was.

5) "Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
ACA started as a community organization that Mr. Carlson slowly turned into a personal business. Who knows what the new ACA is or will be....but I have an educated guess.

6) "Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities."
Read the thread. All praise be to Rich Carlson's all powerful knowledge and influence. Recognition isn't good enough. Ownership of others success is preferrable.

7) "Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises."
How many times has Rich made public commitments or promises and then failed to follow through? Countless.

8) "Changes life story readily."
Rich's (public profile) seems to follow a basic cycle that always ends in a familiar way....the rising phoenix of the canyon martyr.

Diagnosis? Who cares. The decade long behavior speaks for itself.

Phillip...a previous accomplice now turned "humiliated victim"....kinda

[mdd]

Personally I think that the ACA rename just muddies the waters more and in the end does nearly nothing to address the concerns people have shown with the ACA. I would love to see some clarification:

Will the American Canyoneering Academy be a registered entity? (Currently it does not appear in the Nevada, Delaware or Utah online listings, though if he just registered I assume it may take a few days to appear online). Will it be registered as a non-profit or a for-profit entity?

If it is non-profit, will it have a board of directors? Bylaws? Democratic leadership? Transparency?

If it is non-profit, will it still be run as a sole proprietorship, like the original ACA? Does that mean the American Canyoneering Academy will have a competitive advantage against other (private) training and guiding companies with respect to public land permits, etc?

The name of the new org is nearly identical to the old, with the same acronym even. Will this confuse people such as land managers who will still believe that the "new" ACA is still an association representing canyoneers everywhere?

Will Rich still make the membership lists of the old ACA available to a new startup community canyoneering association? If the new ACA is distinct from the old ACA, how are transfer of assets between them handled (such as domain name transfer, membership list transfer, etc)?

Unless Rich files his new ACA as a private, for-profit business, I see basically no value to just changing the name, aside from being able to say "we're not an association anymore...". Wink wink.


M

[mdd]

Answering my own questions. Rich stated this morning that the Academy will be a "wholly owned by me". I guess we'll see if that means he's filing as a non-profit or not. It's a shame he chose to back out on his promise to let the community decide the fate of the ACA on November 1st.

His post:



Anyone who has been around awhile and has been paying attention knows the ACA has never been a "normal" association with members who elect a Board of Directors, etc. It was made very clear in 2002 when I gave up the Yahoo group. I did not want to be involved with politics; all I wanted to do is teach. Looking back, perhaps I should have changed the name from association to academy then. Perhaps it would have avoided some of the problems encountered along the way.

Because the ACA was not involved in political issues, there was never a need for voting members. We considered amending the bylaws twice -- once when we started chapters in 2002 to provide chapters with autonomy, to choose their own leaders, to deal with local/regional issues, etc. and a second time when we started the pro division in 2006 to give control of certification and accreditation issues to pro division members.

This is not the first time I announced I wanted to leave the association. First time in 2002. Then in 2006 and again in 2009. I feel I have finally succeeded in leaving. I don't suppose everyone will see it that way, but I don't really care what a handful of whiners say. The academy is a private enterprise, wholly owned by me. It will focus on training.

I posted an update to my "Unabashed History of the ACA" about membership. I honestly have not seen a benefit to membership in a long time. Overwhelming majority of members joined for one of three reasons: (1) it was included when they took a course, (2) it was required to receive certification, or (3) they wanted to participate in a rendezvous at a time when only members could.

All guides who were certified by the ACA (association) will be welcomed into the American Canyon Guides Association (ACGA) and their certifications will be recognized, as long as they still meed the requirements (i.e. current WFR certification).

I haven't given much thought to future rendezvous. Figure I have all winter to think about it. Maybe. Probably. I always enjoyed hosting them. Posted elsewhere on the forums that I would run them differently in the future. Thread titled, "ACA Canyon Rendezvous".

Maybe someone else will decide to start a representative association that deals with political issues. Maybe, but I doubt it. More people willing to complain than do. But the bigger issue will always be trying to reach consensus. Might be possible when it comes to broad issues like access, but I predict there will even be debates about access. For example, I know many people who support SUWA and others who feel SUWA is the biggest threat to access. Will a new association be pro-SUWA or anti-SUWA? Will it be allowed to remain SUWA-neutral? We'll see.

If it was easy to achieve consensus, would there be a need for three canyoneering forums? I have seen Ram post on the Yahoo group when an issue comes up. Addressing the choir, he asks, "What should WE do about it?" I have chimed in that if the issue affects all canyoneers, he should ask the same question on Bogley and the ACA forums. He never did, referring to Bogley as "The Bog" or "The Swamp" and claiming he does not have the technical expertise required to post on the ACA forums. He's not alone. There are plenty of people who will post on Bogley, but never on the other two. People who will post on ACA, but never on the other two. Or on two of the three, but not the other.

We think we should be united by our love for canyoneering, but we always let other issues interfere. I don't see an end to it any time soon. I was naive enough to believe everyone would rally around an association, we would sing kumbaya around the campfire and address all the nasty issues together. I tried and failed. I don't see anyone in the community with any hope of doing better. If he/she is out there, they are hiding.

[Iceaxe]

Anyone who has been around awhile and has been paying attention knows the ACA has never been a "normal" association with members who elect a Board of Directors, etc. It was made very clear in 2002 when I gave up the Yahoo group.

Actually.... it was a "normal" association in the beginning. Otherwise the genie would have never been released from the bottle. If the original ACA supporters had of realized Rich's intended miss-direction earlier the ACA would have never happened.

Prior to 2002, Back when I supported the ACA, the concept was presented to me that the ACA would be an umbrella organization for the canyoneering community. Myself and many others provided support with the understanding that once the organization was up and rolling the ACA would be guided by an elected Board of Directors with an elected chairman. The original discussions regarding a time-line for an election was two years.

The problems began in the fall of 2002, when Rich's original self-appointed BOD and the general membership began discussing a future election (and other issues Rich disagreed with), at which point Rich fired the BOD and appointed himself dictator (with Dave Black and Charley Oliver as an ADVISORY board). FWIW: dictator were Rich's exact words. At this time Rich also implemented a policy of "scorched earth" in regards to anyone that disagreed with him.

The ACA problems continue to this day by using the same strategy, which is to build the organization on the backs of people that really want to create something special. Only to find out at a later date they are building an empire solely for one person and their concerns don't matter.

So Rich, I will ask you again... If you really want to "just teach", let the membership vote on the future direction of the ACA as promised and just go teach.

[restrac2000]

I will send out the request for bylaws and foundational documents today, assuming my medical appointments don't interfere (possible).

In the next few weeks I will be up in SLC for neurological and vascular studies. During that time I am planning on meeting with the state and legal council to educate myself on the laws surrounding the business practices of the ACA (both entities). I don't expect the legal prognosis to be in favor of disenfranchised members but I still have hope. If/when I get relevant information I will post it to this board and yahoo. If legal recourse seems possible I will likely put out a public appeal for donations and help. Once again that seems highly unlikely. Between the law, the cost and energy required I don't see many legal solutions at this point.

To make matters worse, Rich registered canyoneering.net under Canyons and Crags. The ACA's website is officially owned by Rich's personal business. I don't think most ACA members were aware of this discrepancy, which further muddles the ethical practices of the former association.

Rich has dug his feet deeply into the sand and exposed his selfish intent and priorities. The legality of him taking the member list to his new business is highly suspect but hard to analyze because the Nevada AG will not provide regulation information or direction. However, Nevada does require official dissolution of domestic non-profits. Unfortunately, how the ACA previous lapse and revocation of corporation status plays into that situation is extremely difficult to answer. Once again the information is not easy for the layman or member of the previous ACA. Nevada seems to favor the organization and director over its customers and members.

While the ACA may not have broken any laws it is obvious that Rich Carlson manipulated the trust of the community for his own gain. This is more transparent now with the unofficial name change. The name change doesn't make the previous ethical allegations disappear it actually makes them worse. Unless Rich Carlson forfeits the client list and domain name we are actually in a worse spot than before as a community. In the past I was uncomfortable predicting intent. Now, it is fully obvious to me that Rich is comfortable and willing to perpetuate the social fraud that began back in the early 2000s. He wants the name ACA solely because he personally benefits. This is malicious on his part. He has exposed both personal and professional issues with integrity and honesty. That should make even the most adamant supporter nervous.

Phillip

[reflection]

To the group: I was going to take a break, a long break; and then the Acadamy mysteriously arose and I saw the RC commentary on the ACA site, his flagging and deleting of posts and his reshaping parts of the past decade of canyoneering history. And then the cogent commentary by Shane on the ACA site, outlining organization and association boards, their origin and evolution and a possible reshaping of a canyoneering group. And then the pretty bitter rebuke, that he somehow didn't understand? The other side or sides? A bit like a political party, religion or clan that neither recognizes nor accepts others views, and talk too loud or long to the contrary, and one is banished.

Oldno - psychological disorders, personality styles and mannerism. Interesting stuff, analyzing others, their dark or light karma and then the needed vulnerability, in my view, to recognize one's own weaknesses.

And Phil - your heart is into this, but I'd take a break from the corporate research in Nevada or Utah. What shows up in Utah in the Division of Corporation Records, on the internet anyway, is going to be as much as an office clerk is going to know. And public officials in Salt Lake or Nevada, really won't have an interest or inclination to engage on what they will deem a non issue or concern. As to non profit registration, most govt. offices require a threshold form and payment; Articles of Incorporation (for small non-profits) are most often not filed with states and bylaws are rarely if ever lodged. Corporation officers and Board members are the parties with standing to view and request said documents from other officers. Probably/possibly, updated or past articles of incorporation or bylaws simply don't exist. If debt, dues or money reside with ACA, no agency is going to care. The sole stakeholder, controls the cards and the game.

Legal Entities: Corporation, LLC, Partnerships, Sole Proprietorships. Each of the these can carry a dba - doing business as; and in the corporate realm, they can be dejure (in law and registered) or defacto (in fact and not registered). Be aware, many small businesses, contrary to state and local laws, don't file and register. A consequence? Depends what transactions occur and whether the public interest or retail sales occur.

For 8 years, ACA was operating as a domestic non-profit out of Nevada. RC and his wife. And then the registration lapsed and the filing became dormant and delinquent. There is no record of an ACA or Canyons and Crag listing with the Utah Corporation Division. And if and when AC Academy does or does not register with the Utah corporation division and with the county or municipality where it is operating, then it's basically up to the sole proprietor to operate as he or she wish. Only when laws are violated, and public officials become concerned would any action initiate. Parties contracting with or engaging in monied transaction would do well though to verify the statues of state and municipal licensing (of an entity) before finalizing agreements. Arguably, if there were misrepresentation or even misundertanding, an agreement could be deemed void or voidable.

Don't wish to put a microscope on another human being. In a month from now, if AC Acadamy is not at least listed as a DBA with the state and if there is no county or municipal licensing or registration, then I guess? interested parties can well, remind, that some styles, paths continue. And mostly, if it's publicly announced as a sole proprietorship, rather than that of a perceived national association, then the principal(s) can largely do as they wish, legally.

This drama caused me to wonder? Loyalty, does it blind some or most of us? And when a thank you for your effort is offered and then a caution thrown out, re the lack of transparency and board organization, why did the grenades from all sides continued to offer? And why is it that some/so many don't care re the past ACA structure and completely look past the sole proprietor leadership? Reminds me that so many into canyoneering, are wrapped pretty tight into whatever clan they've been been living or lounging in. And yes, Oldno, there are many things out there in life, more prudent and compelling than canyoneering; but this stuff, the conflcts and tension that plays out (recently) daily- and there are some whoppers -pretty interesting stuff. And to think I saw plays this summer in Cedar City. Midsummer Night's Dream comes to mind. And Puck and his misguided merriment. Seems to me there are Pucks on both or all sides, except there is no pixie dust or king to reset and right the wrongs.

Will be interesting to see where the loyalties lead in the year ahead, and to see if any other groups, ZAC, Zion Rock, folk in Moab, Blanding or elsewhere, put the shingle up and offer to teach and educate SAR groups, boy scout leaders or corporate organizations? AC Acadamy can/will be one voice and business offering (with the ACA site and name base in it's pocket) and other groups can lead out too. Maybe or maybe not?

And please, I wish I could have offered all of the above, as most of you successfully do, in one punchy line. But then the curtain opened and yesterday and today the actors moved about. Someone had to post a review, even if it was a bit slanted; but then of course that's the human way?

[Iceaxe]

I know this will come as a big shock to many of you... NOT...... but as you can tell from the state records Rich had no intention of ever putting the future direction of the ACA up for a vote.

American Canyoneering Academy
Company Type DBA
Address Cedar City
Registered Agent Judy Carlson
Status, Active as of 10/3/2011
Renew by 10/0302011
Status Description Good Standing.

I'm posting this because I thought some of you might like a peek behind the smoke and mirrors.

:cool2:

[restrac2000]

Yeah, that seemed final with his last statement. I think there is still pressure to apply to the former ACA. Bylaws need to be found for the former "association" to understand how the former ACA was required to undertake "dissolution". Until then the questions of ownership of member lists and intellectual property still exists.

It seems questionable that he was able to just absorb them into the new ACA. Unfortunately, there isn't likely to be any recourse. Nevada, were the former ACA was incorporated, is extremely lenient. "Members" like myself may just have to accept being disenfranchised. I will never support the new ACA unless Rich relinquishes the acronym/name and starts fresh. I don't see that happening. I believe he is fine with ethical implications of the malfeasance and knows he benefits from it.

[restrac2000]

Also of note....

I did a follow up of the ACA and Canyons & Crags permitting question. Thus far neither organization has permits with: Cedar City BLM, Dixie National Forest, or DNR.

Operating under "commercial gain" is illegal in Benson Creek. Commercial gain is a broad term often used to imply any benefit received to a business, i.e. not just funds. Unfortunately, finding the exact documents relating to this DNR code hasn't been easy. Both Canyons & Crags and the ACA have both operated there in the past; Canyons & Crags is operating there (http://www.meetup.com/ACA-Canyoneering/events/34781432/) as we write/speak.

Agencies yet to respond: St. George BLM office (Yankee Doodle), County and City ("T-Bird Gardens" is owned by one I believe).

Once I have a complete response from all the agencies I will write an official letter and post it here.

[Iceaxe]

It's the date "Active as of 10/3/2011", Rich announced he was giving up the ACA to the winner of the beauty contest and either had already or immediately filed for the new name. Which means the I give up, please let someone else handle the pressure, may the next person do a better job was just a dog and pony show.

[restrac2000]

Nice catch, I didn't put 2and2 together. Integrity? Honesty? Not on this one.

Phillip

[Felicia]

It's the date "Active as of 10/3/2011", Rich announced he was giving up the ACA to the winner of the beauty contest and either had already or immediately filed for the new name. Which means the I give up, please let someone else handle the pressure, may the next person do a better job was just a dog and pony show.

This was a despicable maneuver! :nono:

:angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angry fire:

[ratagonia]

It's the date "Active as of 10/3/2011", Rich announced he was giving up the ACA to the winner of the beauty contest and either had already or immediately filed for the new name. Which means the I give up, please let someone else handle the pressure, may the next person do a better job was just a dog and pony show.

I disagree. Registering a DBA is not a big deal. If I had a twinkle in my eye of a new name I might want to use, I would Register it as a DBA just to be on the safe side. Same with a website domain. So, call it subterfuge if you like, I call it contingency planning.

Tom (not generally considered a fan of The Big Red One, though I love the movie)

[n00basaurus_rex]

Posted by Rich this morning:

Decision has been made. No need to wait until Nov 1. The American Canyoneering Association is going away completely. If someone wants to start a new association, more power to them. If they do, I will send out a notice to everyone on our email list to inform them about the new association and let them decide if they want to join.


http://www.canyoneering.net/forums/showthread.php?4870-ACA-Needs-a-New-Owner&p=28907#post28907


Rich has deleted the thread on the ACA site.

:roll:

[restrac2000]

Revisionist coward

Makes sense for the gatekeeper of the truth to delete anything that contradicts with his opinion.

Phillip