
This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Alamance on 18 August 2016 - 01:08
by Alamance on 21 August 2016 - 01:08
Suddenly right hand person has taken that personal club into USCA's fold as seen in the magazine's listing of clubs. Since the Mag doesn't come out every month, this abandoning had to have happened many months ago, I would hazard a guess.
USCA made a huge mess of their new rule that may no longer be enforced that No one could belong to two alike clubs. People had to drop one club. The renewal form had very threating words if they found out one had dared to belong to a second club.
Here a former enemy to them and holding all kinds of high level officer positions in WDA is now with a club part of their camp and seemingly no fuss no mess.
Years and years ago I received with absolutely No reason s/his whip across my face, so to speak.
There was to be some kind of court case this past week. Zee president said there was no talk order back some months ago. Maybe then he cannot tell that His club has gone bye bye.
His second support person in Germany has also gone, so he is standing deep in dog poop created by his doing.
Hearing that his #1 buddy had left his side and was now in the enemy's field, figured WDA was dead. Maybe no court case now!

by Cutaway on 22 August 2016 - 16:08
actually "his number 2" has been telling the WDA clubs to just play the game and know that this will be all over soon. She feels that the WDA will be vindicated in court, she will get reimbursed for the Event charges placed on her CC and the WDA will be back up and running with the full support of the GSDCA and SV...

by Cutaway on 25 August 2016 - 03:08
Took me a while to source the documents, but Colorado dismissed the case with prejudice in favor of GSDCA. Unfortunately it seems the the transcripts of the notes in the hearing are sealed
WDA in their most recent Hundergram is trying to spin it in like it was a win for them and feel they will get a favorable ruling in California

by Dog1 on 25 August 2016 - 04:08
Last I heard the WDA was able to whine and say they did not have enough time to secure counsel. The court changed with prejudice to without prejudice. The case was open again. Meanwhile the WDA went to the CA court and asked them to hear the case.
Not sure what's transpired since then, but I do see where it has been settled on the GSDCA website.
There was the GSDCA case against the WDA pending. Not sure if that was a part of the deal or if it is still outstanding.
Not that it matters anymore. The WUSV has nailed the WDA coffin shut by siding with the two WUSV members and only supplying judges to the two WUSV clubs. WDA is out. No events with SV judges. That means club, regional, or National. I don't think there's anyone left on the board. I see a few are USCA members and you can't be a USCA member and a WDA member at the same time.
by Alamance on 26 August 2016 - 18:08
Rather funny and at the same time sad that they can only obtain SV judges through GSDCA the very group they are fighting.
When this Ca case is settled, more time is gone. And because of the two cases, there may be re-structuring needed and more time gone. One item is the way SV judges are allowed to be used by WDA if at all.
Even if WDA wins whatever in CA, they have lost so much as clubs, members, SV judge format. Gained loss of respect and a maybe a need to re-do national club structure with no real income and hostility between clubs and members.
Can they really re-gain the status of what they had about five years ago without all the disrespect they have earned in those same five years? Or is it more money down the gopher hole? Those members who have left or those that will be due to case results, will and are not going to return. Effort has to be made to try to bring in newbies. Convince them and the old timers that by gones are gone and a new club is arising. More money needed.
Sad that after all this mess, they have destroyed their own club --drunk their own poison. In Europe are the stone remains of the mighty Rome, but it itself is gone.

by bubbabooboo on 26 August 2016 - 19:08
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top