[smoothy]

I can see we might need a little more info... such as what general type of project is this, and what was the embarrassing event and how does it connect to the actual project goals? Leaving out names of course.

[wallabee4]

Let's say it's something like a fundraiser and an STP member was something like caught with hand in the till because she had no supervisions/check/balances. If we add the 50 new people, we are also keeping the original STP members, too, it just becomes less workload/more ability to have checks and balances as no one is as overworked/overlooked. The offending member is actually still here. Just apologized as claimed ignorance, and, member who answered me just wants to push past and moving forward blindly thinking that the new membership will solve everything whereas I can see that if the new 50 don't see consequences/check and balances put in we could either A. have someone join who is looking to get a hand in the till likewise or B. we will have the 50 people leave and go back to the original STP because no one in their right mind would want to be part of a group that ignores/condones theft. Much more complicated, this is a simplified version

[wallabee4]

Wondergirl, where are you?

could probably spin the negative you've had trouble with into a positive for you.

Am looking for the positive spin here, pleaae help if you can

[Wondergirl]

Wondergirl, where are you? Am looking for the positive spin here, pleaae help if you can

I was eating lunch.

What's the value of tossing in 50 more people? And I'm still not sure what happened after reading that two different times. You want to keep employees from sticking their hand in the till? Did the STP condone the theft? Sounds like you need a check for a thieving possibility, not a revised STP. The thief wasn't overworked and then stole. The thief was a thief. The STP forgave her because she was one of them, the "old gang."

When I was in a non-profit that did fundraisers, the same old people did not run every one. The particular fundraising committee always kept some former members (to prevent historical problems) but always added new ones (for fresh ideas).

[smoothy]

Let's say it's something like a fundraiser and an STP member was something like caught with hand in the till because she had no supervisions/check/balances. If we add the 50 new people, we are also keeping the original STP members, too, it just becomes less workload/more ability to have checks and balances as no one is as overworked/overlooked. The offending member is actually still here. Just apologized as claimed ignorance, and, member who answered me just wants to push past and moving forward blindly thinking that the new membership will solve everything whereas I can see that if the new 50 don't see consequences/check and balances put in we could either A. have someone join who is looking to get a hand in the till likewise or B. we will have the 50 people leave and go back to the original STP because no one in their right mind would want to be part of a group that ignores/condones theft. Much more complicated, this is a simplified version

Ok... thats way beyond embarrassing... thats actually embezzlement. No problem... I fully understand the need to give a readers digest version with all the Identifying information omitted. That has completely changed the perspective on this... in my eyes anyway.

There would be very real legal ramnifications with that, for anyone with knowledge of the act that allowed it to happen / continue. With that information, I do see the urgency of the perspective you were pushing. And THAT is something I would not consider unimportant or self serving.

If for example it was political fundraising there are a whole different set of laws that come into play as well.

[wallabee4]

This is getting more complicated than it needs to be. Let's go back to, what did you have good for lunch, Wondergirl? :)

I know the problem needs addressing. One thing: the theft was not exactly that, it was just as close a comparison I was willing to make here in this forum. What took place was in fact ethically and morally even disgustingly wrong but I'm not sure it was illegal.

I was actually part of the original STP and because we were few numbers we were overtasked and things got overlooked until it was too late. I was the one who discovered it but not the one who brought it to light because first I tried to handle it directly with the guilty party, so now I'm seen as one of 2 negative nellies of the STP I guess, the ones of the 'old gang' who weren't about to condone wrongdoing. And I am constantly being painted as the bad guy here. One middle-of-the-road STP did say he was glad the wrongdoing came to light because the result was all these new interested members showing up at the next meeting. But the new members see what I see and are here at my elbow willing to come on board and prevent/help/move forward but the old STP vocal spokesperson is just wanting to shove it under a rug and sits happily tasking the new members with jobs they aren't willing to do until they get answers. She thinks they are happily on-board. I know they are tenous at best simply because I talk to them, not above them/around them.

So
How do I both get it out from under the rug and also do it in such a positive way that even the old STP thanks me and the one who's trying to rug it over (did I just coin that expression? ) can save face and allow the rug to be pulled back because the result will be so positive even she can't deny it?

[Wondergirl]

If it was "in fact ethically and morally even disgustingly wrong," why are you -- heck, why SHOULD you -- "rug it over"?

[wallabee4]

I am being 'negative' if I pull the rug off or suggest ousting the guilty party--who by the way led (I kid you not) and did not recuse herself at the only face-to-face meeting we've had so far this year--on the basis that the meeting was about what she had done and so logically for her and other STP members it followed that she should be the one to do all the talking. I was taken off guard. So she led that meeting, but rather than it being an explain/apologize/quit speech, it turned into a praise-for-all-the-good-she-has-done party and a let's-excitedly-welcome-our-new-members party. The new members were reluctant to talk, as has always been the case as they didn't know what was going on. They thought they were coming for answers/explanation but instead saw this. So later now I have pressed the question again in an on-line group discussion and here we sit. Still rugging it over, no where positive to go as I see it. (But I admit I am a negative personality and admire Wondergirl's ability to turn even tooth-spinach into a positive gift-giving instance.)

[wallabee4]

I'm trying to see it from their perspective: I've done something wrong and I'm embarrassed being caught, I want to just hide it, forget it, and move on. I'm really glad there are a bunch of people now around me who might (possibly?) help keep me honest, and all I want to do is focus on the positive, remember I'm not all bad, and believe real hard that everything is going to be OK. But here's this dark horse who keeps bringing up what I want to forget about. I want that dark horse to just forget it, too.

Now, in fact, I'm the dark horse, not the one who did something wrong.

So how do I approach this and come off so that addressing it is a positive thing in their perspective?

[wallabee4]

And how do I do this and still be a team player?

[Wondergirl]

What I've hearing is that an "in fact ethically and morally even disgustingly wrong" act was committed by one organization member. Why wasn't she properly disciplined, even ousted, and safeguards then put into place so it wouldn't happen again? It sounds like you are trying to whitewash it too, and by adding more employees to the STP, you think this won't happen again.

This doesn't sound like a situation that can be re-spun from negative to positive (to spare feelings? To save face?). Then, you too are "rugging it over."

Being a team player is not the issue!

[wallabee4]

OK. I 100% agree with you, but started this thread with the feelings that I wasn't being a team player, and I know that is often a fault of mine, so I was sensitive to that remark. I had just been told I was being negative and we needed simply to move on and 'stay positive' so when you suggested you had a way, I thought perhaps I could find a way, too.

No one 'added new members' it's just that more people took notice that the group needed help and came en masse to a meeting we thought would discuss the wrongdoing but which didn't, it just celebrated all the new interest in the group. (Yes, I'm aware these people are delusional--how do I defeat them? My Mom had Alzheimer's and I never could convince her her hallucinations weren't real.)

My entire goal (tho not voiced as I stand alone in the wind here until just now with you on my side and those here at my elbow) is that the guilty person needs to be removed.

The fact remains, though, that I don't have the power to remove her. And the more I stir things up/report things/ the badder it gets for me. Understand, that hardly stops me, I am just at a moment in time here where if I knew what to say to do it and also make people stop calling me the negative one, that's what I'd most like.

My choices are quit and take the 30 or so here by my elbow with me and see a good fundraiser go down the toilet with the STP bad guys still in charge (As I asked: how would I best extricate myself since I do NOT condone what happened/is happening when I know that later these types will still find way to blame me for why didn't I do something to stop the STP if they continue as they have and do even worse next?) I would like to just walk away and never look back, but it's a situation where I can bet I will be dragged back and blamed for what I did not do.

Or my choice is stay and keep pestering for changes and make it even worse for me.

Do I forget positive and just rip the band-aid off and say you're being delusional and state the facts I know point by point so it's all out there for all interested parties to digest? But I'm not privy to some of the facts. That's why I have questions.

Oh, I give up...

[Wondergirl]

Oh, I give up......................

No, don't do that.

Is this a non-profit that you work for?

You've seen what can happen with one light-fingered member. Does this organization have rules and regs on paper? That's what we had to do with our local cat shelter. One person we discovered was using funds donated for the cats like they were her own pocket money. We didn't accuse her or scold her or oust her (she had value to the shelter and our mission), but we did spend time, not only meeting as a whole to concoct rules and regs, but also found an attorney (who turned out to be a volunteer and worked pro bono) to get us into true, official non-profit status. So from a bad situation of basic theft came a beautiful organization which is very lively and well-organized today.

[tiffany1986]

Maybe you need to talk to the person separately, considering they are probabally embarrassed to talk about it in front of other people. If you get them alone, discuss it with them in privacy not embarrassing them by calling them out in front of the entire group.

[wallabee4]

That was where I started. The person now hiding it under the rug is not the person who did the wrong. Just, as I am starting to realize, an ignorant person who wants to paint the world all cotton candy and roses despite reality