# An Open Letter to the OnLine Modern Arnis Community/ Tim Hartman



## DrBarber (Oct 21, 2005)

Bob Hubbard said:
			
		

> *An Open Letter to the OnLine Modern Arnis Community*​
> In 2001 MartialTalk was launched. It's mission was then and still is to be a friendly place to discuss the arts. A living, growing archive of the thoughts, teachings and ideas that surround the arts and styles we train in. 2001 also saw the passing of the founder of Modern Arnis, Remy Presas. His passing left a void in many lives, and left many who study this art struggling to regain balance. Many things have been said or done, many wounds inflicted, many feelings hurt.
> 
> Our goal, is to document the history, the techniques, the people and the concepts of all the arts. We wish to be a lyceum to the arts, a combination reference library and meeting hall. We want people 10 years from now to be able to come here and see the journey we have been on, and find guidance, and friends, and information.
> ...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------



			
				Tim Hartman said:
			
		

> Re: What does Modern Arnis need?
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ...


Ok Bob,

I can accept your challenge and I will be the first one to step forward by offering a plan to reduce some of the tension, "game playing, posturing, arguments" that have gone on between myself and Tim Hartman. Since my goals have never included:

"causing problems and scew(ing) with people", I am making the following offer:

I am willing to meet with Tim Hartman and discuss in a face to face, one on one conversational manner the differences that are at the root our disagreements. I'll also buy the coffee and danish. Once we have cleared the air, then I am proposing a joint camp to put into action what we might be claiming in print! Action speaks much louder than words. The meeting(s) followed by a joint camp (2 or 3 days) would be a visible, tangible testimonial that verifies that we (Tim and I) can and have 

put our differences behind us. Since I have made this offer several times in the past, both publicly and privately, the burden 

really is not on me to get this thing moving. It takes two people to get a dialogue going. In the past, a number of WMAA people have suggested that Tim and I have such a meeting. It is a case of leading by example. 

In the past when I have shared information and ideas on the MTC forum, a number of people have gone out of their way to stomp all over me and never gave me credit for what I shared with my fellow forum members. I have been able to resolve my diiferences with a number of my detractors through one to one dialogues. All of these same people have pointed the finger directly toward Tim Hartman as the root cause as to why these systematic differences have not been resolved. Tim has here-to-fore declined to even respond to my suggestions that a face to face meeting might be both advantagous and productive. 

Therefore, I believe that by accepting your challenge, openly and directly, I am placing the ball fully. squarely and positively 

in Tim Hartman's court. Can he, will he meet the challege that you a WMAA member and friend have laid out to everyone?

Bob, my response to your stated challenge also puts you and the admin staff of MTC on the spot. Since *you* as the *owner-operator *of MTC have issued the challenge and I have responded in kind, my post *can not* be withhold or removed from the 

fourm. Such action would indicate that you were less than genuine and sincere in your posted statement. You can not do anything that might shield Tim Hartman from having to act on his own behalf with regard to my stated acceptence of *your challenge*. In 2003, my first post suggesting just such a meeting between Tim Hartman and myself was removed by someone in the admin group. Since I am acting in accordence with your challenge and within the new rules that you have established, I fully expect that the decision to respond or not will be left entirely in the hands of Tim Hartman. No one else has the power or authority to speak for him. Any comments coming from others in Tim's behalf will be ignored by me. In order to get the resolution of hostilities and reduction in tension that you believe is possible, Bob, requires that Tim Hartman speak up and speak out for himself.

Respectfully,

Jerome Barber, Ed.D


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 21, 2005)

Note: Post split from prior thread.


----------



## Dan Anderson (Oct 22, 2005)

Hey Tim,

Pony up, meet with Jerome, and let's end this once and for all.  Too much yammering goes on on MT regarding this and you can pitch in and help end it.  There is a difference between taking the high road on being dumped on and sitting down and getting in communication to resolve differences (or at lest agree to not take differences out on the net).

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## Rich Parsons (Oct 22, 2005)

Dan Anderson said:
			
		

> Hey Tim,
> 
> Pony up, meet with Jerome, and let's end this once and for all.  Too much yammering goes on on MT regarding this and you can pitch in and help end it.  There is a difference between taking the high road on being dumped on and sitting down and getting in communication to resolve differences (or at lest agree to not take differences out on the net).
> 
> ...



Dan,

This is a problem, and I am not trying to make it worse, but I think Tim is in Ohio State for a tournament, as I was invited also, but had work to do around my house. Now to my problem. I have offered to teach at an event the Jerome offered, and yet he did not even reply. His own students and training partner as they referred to themselves, asked my why I was not teaching. I said host perogative. In the time frame there was an issue with me and Jerome. I went to NY my cost, and my time he met me there, and we talked  nothing about any of the issues, only Jerome trying to share with me his points of view. I smiled and listened and moved on. I was later treated in what I thought was a very disrespectful manner by Jerome at an event, and I tried to talk to him about it and he said it was nothing, so I walked away saying it was fine, to not make a scene. 

Tim can take care of himself, this is an issue between me and Jerome.

So, would it be acceptable behaviour for me to follow Jerome around and always bring up these issues, including his _choice_ words that I found insulting and derogatory. I mentioned these to him before, no apologies. I asked why I was not to teach at an event with him and he changed the subject. I asked about the Money of one of his events, as NO ONE got paid, and said all were expenses and none of my business. 

Jerome asked me to drop these discussions, and to move on one time. Although he is more than willing to e-mail me about his issue with Tim. Yet, he is not willing to drop his issues with Tim and move on. He insists upon a meeting and joint ventures, something that Tim does not need as he has a full schedule, but does like to have a joint venture from time to time. So, If I put up here a _Challenge_ to Jerome to have a joint venture with me, and to make all the books open for inspection, for all people to be on good behaviour and no insulting _choice_ words and all proceeds to go to a charity, personally I like American Cancer Society, then would this be acceptable behaviour? Would this seem like I am trying to make my point and having Jerome come to my terms and only my terms not a joint understanding. By placing this in the public eye, you kind of nail someone's foot to the ground. 

Personally by Jerome's actions and those around him, with their actions trying to convince me of their point of view, it became "if I was not with them then I was against them".  I try to remain open and listen, but I cannot control how other people draw lines and place people. 

In my opinion this is part of the problem and also what Bob was trying to avoid, no matter how nice the words may be written. 

Now so as to not make it look like I am after Jerome, for we have had an understanding, I would like to ask you Dan a question.

You stated for your event that you would go with Name or Title people, yet some of those present people had to ask who they were, and this makes me wonder if they were really name or title people. But did I get mad at Dan, and carryout a public issue with you? No, I said host perogative and talked to you about your feelings, and it was people you knew and and titles, not reputation nation or world wide. See how the little things can be missunderstood, and yet, I smile and ask questions and do not expect people to give me a spot on teaching or the time of day. It is their option, their event, and how they choose to handle it. 

:asian:


----------



## Tgace (Oct 22, 2005)

If we are going to start rehashing past offenses I have a few of my own.....


*"*The Beloved Enemy*
Nietzsche said that you could measure the stature of a man by looking at his enemies. We are defined as much by our enemies as by our friends, as much by our negatives as by our positives. Just as the opposition between characters in a novel creates the drama, so a person's enemies give shape to the story of his life.
Enemies are dangerous because they consume energy and attention. Also, it's possible to become hypnotized by the thing we hate and stare at it for a lifetime. The energies of many socities and individuals are exhausted by hot and cold warfare. When being _against_ becomes more important than being _with_ or _for_, the enemy has destroyed the independence of your personality. The person who defines his existence as a battle against Communists, blacks, whites, the Establishment, Jews, women, abortionists or Arabs forms a negative identity that indentures him to his enemy. A bad enemy destroys freedom, a good enemy provides the "loving combat" (Karl Jaspers) through which we can test and refine our values."

*_Sam Keen, Anne Valley-Fox (1973) Your Mythic Journey, Los Angles, California:Tarcher Inc. ISBN 0874775434_


----------



## Cebu West (Oct 23, 2005)

OK, so the Modern Arnis section of MT starts out under a new set of rules 

_What we don't want? 
Politics: We don't care what your affiliation is. 
Game Playing: Act like mature adults and stop using this site as a battleground 
Whining 
SPAM 
Negative, tear you down, cause problems, publically air the dirty laundry type crap._

and one of the first threads after this change is Dr Barber's attack (challenge if that's what you want to call it) on Tim Hartman.

Next, Dan Anderson jumps in to fan the flames, again.

If this thread is operating under the new rules I don't see any change at all.

Did anybody ever take the time to realize that some people just don't like some other people and don't want anything to do with them. Get the message and move on. 

Sal Todaro (Cebu West - WMAA)


----------



## Dan Anderson (Oct 23, 2005)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> Dan,
> 
> This is a problem, and I am not trying to make it worse, but I think Tim is in Ohio State for a tournament, as I was invited also, but had work to do around my house.



Hi Rich,
The timing isn't so much the important thing but the communication or lack thereof.  All I am saying is the two of them should get together and actually _talk_ - not get into a piss fest or who has done more than who sort of thing.  


> Now to my problem. I have offered to teach at an event the Jerome offered, and yet he did not even reply. His own students and training partner as they referred to themselves, asked my why I was not teaching. I said host perogative. In the time frame there was an issue with me and Jerome. I went to NY my cost, and my time he met me there, and we talked  nothing about any of the issues, only Jerome trying to share with me his points of view. I smiled and listened and moved on. I was later treated in what I thought was a very disrespectful manner by Jerome at an event, and I tried to talk to him about it and he said it was nothing, so I walked away saying it was fine, to not make a scene.


I remember it quite well.  Did you initiate communication about your feelings?  If you remember, I was very pissed off in NY as well.  You came up to me, quite concerned, and talked with me for a bit about it (thanks, by the way).  I went up to Jerome and confronted him about it and it got handled.



> Tim can take care of himself, this is an issue between me and Jerome.


Yes, he can.  



> So, would it be acceptable behaviour for me to follow Jerome around and always bring up these issues, including his _choice_ words that I found insulting and derogatory. I mentioned these to him before, no apologies. I asked why I was not to teach at an event with him and he changed the subject. I asked about the Money of one of his events, as NO ONE got paid, and said all were expenses and none of my business.
> 
> Jerome asked me to drop these discussions, and to move on one time. Although he is more than willing to e-mail me about his issue with Tim. Yet, he is not willing to drop his issues with Tim and move on. He insists upon a meeting and joint ventures, something that Tim does not need as he has a full schedule, but does like to have a joint venture from time to time. So, If I put up here a _Challenge_ to Jerome to have a joint venture with me, and to make all the books open for inspection, for all people to be on good behaviour and no insulting _choice_ words and all proceeds to go to a charity, personally I like American Cancer Society, then would this be acceptable behaviour? Would this seem like I am trying to make my point and having Jerome come to my terms and only my terms not a joint understanding. By placing this in the public eye, you kind of nail someone's foot to the ground.
> 
> ...


Only one of the arnis teachers was not a public name, Bob Quinn, and he has been in the arnis scene for many, many years.


> But did I get mad at Dan, and carryout a public issue with you? No, I said host perogative and talked to you about your feelings, and it was people you knew and and titles, not reputation nation or world wide.


You leave out one VERY important thing, Rich.  WE COMMUNICATED.  And that is what I am talking about.  WE TALKED.  You found out what was going on and that was that.



> See how the little things can be missunderstood, and yet, I smile and ask questions and do not expect people to give me a spot on teaching or the time of day. It is their option, their event, and how they choose to handle it.



:asian:[/QUOTE]

Sal,


> Next, Dan Anderson jumps in to fan the flames, again.
> Sal Todaro (Cebu West - WMAA)





> Hey Tim,
> 
> Pony up, meet with Jerome, and let's end this once and for all. Too much yammering goes on on MT regarding this and you can pitch in and help end it. There is a difference between taking the high road on being dumped on and sitting down and getting in communication to resolve differences (or at lest agree to not take differences out on the net)."



_This_ is a flame fan?  A request to communicate so as to end the online bickering once and for all is fanning the flames?  You don't know me so you are wildly misreading me.  Reread the post and do so without partisan feelings.  Personally, I would like to see them hash it out and end it but in a two-way situation, it takes a two-way handle otherwise it will persist.  Sometimes both people will drop it but if one won't, then communication needs to occur.  Pure and simple, Jerome is not dropping it (and I predict won't) until communication has occurred and has been acknowledged.

I have no hidden agenda here.  Jerome and I get along just fine.  Tim and I communicate although we are not close.  I will predict something here and that if they do not communicate, it will persist.

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## Cebu West (Oct 23, 2005)

> This is a flame fan?



Yea it is. Just like when you tried to reopen the Paul and Kelly nonsense. 

Maybe Tim just doesn't like Jerome and doesn't want to communicate with him. If that is the case he has that right and doesn't need to be parented by you. Stay out of it. 

This thread should not have been allowed, but as usual we're back to the some old crap. Lock down the thread and let Dr Barber deal with his problems off line where they belong.

There is nothing good that can come from this thread, I'm out.

Sal


----------



## Tgace (Oct 23, 2005)

After making your proclamations and "not fanning" any flames yourself huh? 

Wouldnt have reporting this thread to a moderator or PMing an admin been less hypocritical than taking your own shots? Thats always been my point on these political threads. If they offend you that much dont read or post to them and let them die. However people cant resist.....


----------



## Dan Anderson (Oct 23, 2005)

Cebu West said:
			
		

> Yea it is. Just like when you tried to reopen the Paul and Kelly nonsense.
> 
> Maybe Tim just doesn't like Jerome and doesn't want to communicate with him. If that is the case he has that right and doesn't need to be parented by you. Stay out of it.
> 
> ...


Yo, Sparky!

Way off base again.  You read too much cabal in my post.  Your defense of Tim is heartening but your misduplication of what I wrote is as fascinating as it is off base.  I am as tired of this Hartman/Barber thing as the next guy and a call for communication is, in now way, a flame fan.  Reread my post and use a dictionary this time.

Dan


----------



## Michael Billings (Oct 23, 2005)

Thread locked for violating policy due to tone, name calling, and challenges being made counter to the stated intent and spirit of MartialTalk.  

-Michael Billings
-MT Asst. Administrator-


----------

