# The Basic Problem of Modern Arnis and the Future



## DoctorB

Bob Hubbard wrote the following:

Folks,
I've sat back a bit and watched this thing go --way-- in a direction I never intended it to go.

All I was wondering about was some of the history.

It got political, it got personal and it got ugly.

enough for now.

Datu Hoffman will be making his information public shortly.
I believe Paul has the answers he wanted for the moment.
I think that while there are still a few unanswered questions, this thread is best locked, and those topics either taken to PM and email, and the positive parts posted, or at the least, new threads more closely focused on the topics should be made.

If you choose the later, please, keep it civil, and try not to get blood on the walls. The cleaning bill around here latelys been getting a bit nuts.

Thank you.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Therein is the real problem with Modern Arnis and the future.  Many people want to make their claims yet soundly reject and deny the claims of others based on what Professor is alledged to have said.  There is a long history of charge & counter-charge 
plus a considerable amount of duplicity within Modern Arnis and I have seen quite a bit of it since 1981 when I first got into training with my instructor Sifu Don Zanghi.   I got out of the mess in 1994 after one too many incidences started by Professor himself.

The problem for you, Bob, is that no matter what you or anyone else tries to start, including myself, the vicious, the ugly and the nasty elements that are at the bedrock of the Modern Arnis organizations will always come bubbling to the surface.

Due to two deaths in my family and the necessity to get involved in the things that accompany that situation, I did not participate in the thread on Who's Who after a couple of early posts.  But the comments that I read and given the posts of Paul Janulis, Dan Anderson and David Hoffman in particular, you can see the issues emerge and develop.  Closing the thread is your option to exercise, however, the grit, grime and dishonesty will not disappear.

I have received 15 private e-mails telling me in various ways that I have taken on a thankless task in organizing the Symposium.  ALL of the writers acknowledged that the Symposium was a good idea and a necessary item, however 11 of the writers were not going to attend because of one or two people who are on the instructional program.  The "politics" of the past has infected their thinking processes and their anger at someone has deprived these people of their ability to see beyond the immediate moment.

Think about it Bob, 10 - 30 people were considered for leadership of Professor retired.  That's a lot of people for an organization that very little structure in the first place.  Think about all of the titles that have floated around in Modern Arnis under Professor.
The only one with any longivity was "Datu"!!!  That and the numers 10 - 30 should be a real eye-opener for a lot of people, but I doubt that it will actually happen!  Why?  Because it is easier to take the self serving positions based on what Professor is alledged to have said to this person or that.  The drama continued right up to his death.

If I read the comments of Datu Kelly Worden correctly, in his article published last month in CFW's "Filipino Martial Arts" Professor left the Grand Mastership of Modern Arnis to his grandson!!!  That sure as hell puts a whole new light on the relevance  of Marppio, the MoTTs and Mr. Delaney from an organizational perspective doesn't it?

I was not one bit surprised that the Who's Who thread got heated.  It was to be expected.  There are too many claims out there regarding leadership and who is or is not preserving the art as taught by Professor Presas.  That bunch of titles, all the promises and statements, the 10 to 30 people slated as possible future leaders of the art are clear are compelling information to me with regard to the future of Modern Arnis and the picture is not a pretty one.

I organized the Symposium on one very compelling premise - Skill is the final arbitor of Real and significant Rank.  My second premise is that people need to come together to talk to one another and listen carefully to what is being said.  The politics will not end but the intensity can be diminished if people understand where the real sources of the problems are in Modern Arnis.
My third premise is that no one will emerge from the Symposium as the new consenus leader of the new "Post-Professor Era" of Modern Arnis, however, we all will have an opportunity to 'cross-train' within the art because of the 12 instructors who will be present and teaching.  My fourth and final premise is that the Symposium is a significant historical event within Modern Arnis because it represents the frist time that there has been a collective collaberation between so many instructors and they cross over the sub-organizational divisions and independents within art.  

I recognize that the last premise is difficult and uncomfortable for some people who still want to idealize Professor and stick to the predictable summer camp mode of days gone by.  However for those willing to take some chances, the Symposium offers a viable opportunity to see what others have and currently are doing to make the art grow3as a living entity.

It will be very interesting to read what David Hoffman has to say when his post comes out, but I am moving forward with the Symposium because that is the future not the past.  We will make histroy within the art and those who miss it will have to settle for written accounts, photos and videotape...

Jerome Barber, Ed.D.


----------



## Dieter

> If I read the comments of Datu Kelly Worden correctly, in his article published last month in CFW's "Filipino Martial Arts" Professor left the Grand Mastership of Modern Arnis to his grandson!!! That sure as hell puts a whole new light on the relevance of Marppio, the MoTTs and Mr. Delaney from an organizational perspective doesn't it?



Well, I know what Kelly has written.
Roland Dantes was there too and told the story with a slight different touch:

The way Roland told it, it sounded more that the Grandpa asked is Grandchild with a loving smile: "So you will be the future Grandmaster?" 

To me this sounds totally different than a statment: "You will be the new Grandmaster".

Anyway, nobody of us was there, so we can talk and write until our fingers bleed, we will never know, what Remy´s plans were, if he really had other plans than making people happy. (i don´t me4an this negativly)
Not that this whole thing is too important, because only Jeff Delaney claims successorship and Gradmaster status up to now and nobody else.

And maybe, one day, when Carlos is trained well, why not, we will see what the future will bring.


I just wanted to share this version, that has a slightly different touch.


Regards from Germnay and I hope to see many of you in Buffalo in 10 days. 
I will be there.


Dieter Knüttel
Datu of Modern Arnis


----------



## Dan Anderson

A couple of comments.  First I agree with DrB's four main premises for having the Symposium.  I also agree it is a thankless job to put it on so prior to even having the event, I'll be the first to thank him here in print.

People tend to really adhere to their first "stable datum."  You can look at a stable datum as that datum you use to align other random elements of a confusion.  As that is _the _datum used, people can get rather contentious when that datum is shook or rattled. "What Remy _said to me_... (wanted, envisioned, meant, insert your own words here)" is a stable datum for most.  That becomes the datum to stave off confusion or be a guiding light if you will.  Rattle that and you'll have upset.  Note: prior training can be a stable datum.  Try an teach a student who has trained elsewhere.  You know what I mean.

The first thing that occurs when you bring order into an area is that confusion in that area blows off.  The manner in which Remy Presas conducted affairs was somewhat of a confusion to others and his death really left a confusion afterwards.  WMAA, IMAF, Inc., IMAF, WMAC, MARPPIO, Modern Arnis 80, Modern Arnis Philippines, DAV, the 2003 Modern Arnis Symposium are all efforts to bring order into an area.  And they are succeeding.  Look at all the confusion blowing off.  As I have said to anyone who will listen, the dust will settle in the next 3-5 years.  You'll see.

Paul Janulis said in a recent post on another thread that he likes the flavor of WMAA Modern Arnis over IMAF Modern Arnis.  This is the most sanely stated way of saying what will happen with Modern Arnis in the future.  I have seen Modern Arnis done by the above stated styles/organizations with the exception of Modern Arnis Philippines and they all have a different flavor to each.  Kelly's MA has a different flavor to Tim's MA.  Insert any other name into the first section of the sentence and the same in the last part and there you have it.  Who is going to get into a big upset because they like dark chocolate over milk chocolate?  

Extend that concept to Modern Arnis and there you have what it really is.  Modern Arnis is not science, it is a fighting art.  Science tells you if the wheel is not round you are going to have a bumpy ride.  Art is personal expression and personal preference.  Remy's art was different that Anciong's art.

My own personal expression of what Remy Presas taught me is, whether anyone agrees or not, is Modern Arnis 80.  Tim likes to call it "Dan's slant on Remy's art."  That's fair enough.  The WMAA curriculum is Tim's slant on Remy's art.  Are either of us wrong?  No. There's my 47 cents on this matter.

On a totally different note, my condolences to DrB regarding the two deaths in his family.  I hope things are sorting out.  See you in Buffalo, Jerome.

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## David Hoffman

Hello Dieter,

You are correct in your assessment of what Professor intended for Nonoy (Carlos). You will note that Nonoy hardly knew his grandfather and had never trained with him. He told me he had been abandoned. Nonoy had made a post in eskrima digest trying to get in contact with Professor when he heard from my announcement that he was ill. I then corresponded with him and arraigned a telephone call which occurred from our hotel room where Professor was recovering from surgery. I was present and heard everything Professor said and discussed it with him later. What happened was, Nonoy showed interest in learning Arnis, Professor was very happy about this as none of his children had shown any interest in training with him for last 26 years or attended any of his camps or seminars. I am not judging them for this choice, this is simply how it was. Professor invited him to a future camp. I and others were to give him special attention at the camp so he could learn the art. Nonoy was invited to attend for free as well. This was a warm and sincere invitation. Professor always told young people at seminars that they could be the next Grand Master. The same thing was said to young Kevin, Lisas son. She too has chosen to interpret this as a nomination which it was not. It was how he was and indeed, Professor believed everyone had unlimited potential. Obviously there is a long road from young beginner to Grandmaster. Never did Professor nominate Nonoy as the next Grandmaster, he merely welcomed him back and encouraged him to learn. In my opinion, some of those returning to the art after ten, twenty five or more years, will find themselves much more welcome if they did not make claims that disregarded the entire last twenty five years of the development of the art and its leadership structure. I support the adult children in their desire to carry on the family lineage. However, I can not accept the re writing of history or the dismissing of the true history and development of the art and leadership structure. 

Datu David Hoffman


----------



## Dan Anderson

> _Originally posted by Dieter _
> * so we can talk and write until our fingers bleed, we will never know, what Remy´s plans were...  Regards from Germany and I hope to see many of you in Buffalo in 10 days.
> I will be there.
> 
> Dieter Knüttel
> Datu of Modern Arnis *



Somebody must be making lots of money in bandaids from all of the bloody fingers.  
 
Yep, see you in Buffalo.

Yours,
Dan Anderson

PS - David, you coming?


----------



## dearnis.com

This really hits at the heart of the problem; we are focused on the idea that there will be, or somehow should be, a unified Modern Arnis.  
Whether this _should_ be the case is irrelevant; it simply is not going to happen.
Before anyone goes off on what follows please understand a few things.  I had as much respect, concern, and admiration for Professor as anyone.  I was hooked on Modern Arnis from the first seminar.  I have, then and since, done my part to try and share and spread the art.
That being said, Modern Arnis by its nature will never have the tightness of various other systems.  Too many gifted players came in from other backgrounds, had split loyalites, had other influences in their arnis.  This is the essence of the art within your art, and it is the strength of Modern Arnis as Professor taught it; it blends with, supports, and improves any system.  But when we speak of a successor what are we really saying?  Successor to the art, or to a system? 
 IF there had been a coherent organization then perhaps someone could ultimately take the helm, but the IMAF was never more than a logo on a patch or a certificate.  To speak of someone being Professor's successor calls for a higher level of skil (on many levels) than I believe we have availible.  What is left?  Successor to the art?  
Sorry, that is both all of us and none of us.  We all took something of what Remy Presas gave and made it our own.  In a very real sense, because of the variation that he allowed and encouraged, there is no one standard version of the art.  This is where many groups are trying to "develop" a curriculum where there was none in a formal sense (indeed almost trying to develop a group after leadership has been set up).
Tim Hartman often reminds us that Professor did, and got away with doing, certain things because he had a rare blend of attributes.  This is important to remember as we move forward with the art.  None of us can be Remy; those leaders who succeed in bringing themselves and their groups into the future will ultimately do so by nurturing and cultivating the art, not merely by trying to preserve it.
There has been much appeal to promises made a dying man, to what RP would have wanted.  Well my friends, the bottom line is that Remy Presas would have wanted his art, his life's work to flourish and move ahead.  Ultimately the wills, the death bed promotions, and all the rest were merely his attempt to ensure that that was what would happen.  The debate is really a hollow one at the present time.  Let's be honest; say a will comes out tomorrow naming a board of 25 (or 15 or 17 or 29 1/2; take your pick).  It isn't going to happen.  It just isnt.  The future of the art lies with the groups now teaching it, large and small.  
I think it is about time to forget about the past and look ahead.


----------



## Brian Johns

> _i
> The debate is really a hollow one at the present time.  Let's be honest; say a will comes out tomorrow naming a board of 25 (or 15 or 17 or 29 1/2; take your pick).  It isn't going to happen.  It just isnt.  The future of the art lies with the groups now teaching it, large and small.
> I think it is about time to forget about the past and look ahead. [/B]_


_ 

Chad really hit on the nail in his last post. I really feel like that all the debating that has been going on is hollow.  I feel that all the debates and the Symposium will not really do anything to resolve  any of the issues. As Chad said, the future of the art lies with the various groups teaching it. Find a group that you like and go with the flow. To be honest, I really am tired of all the debate regarding who's who in Modern Arnis. The Symposium isn't going to change anybody's minds. I think all of this is really pointless.

Take care,
Brian_


----------



## Cruentus

:erg: :anic:  

Just to add my 2 cents regarding little "grandmaster" Nanoy or Kevin.

When I had Professor over my house in 2000, he and my little 13 year old brother Jimmy were screwing around with the canes (no serious training) and Professor grinned at me and said, "Faulino, your frother is ver-y good! He will be the next Grandmaster!" Then we all had a pretty good laugh.

This backs up Mr. Hoffmans point.

Professor had a habit of saying things to make people happy, and he often didn't intend people to take his words, or even actions as gospel.

Jimmy isn't a grandmaster anymore then those other two kids. To claim successorship or Grandmastership based off of a non-serious, on-the-side comment is ridicules. I feel bad for young McManus and Nanoy in this circumstance. It is not their fault that they are being crowned a false prince by influences who should know better. 

Oh well....more crap to clog the toilet, I guess.
:flushed:


----------



## Bob Hubbard

Personally... and this is my -personal- opinion here...

Lets just train.  Tims my instructor, and I think he's a darn good one.  That doesn't mean that I can't pick up some tips, or even new techniques from anyone else.  Most of y'all have been hangin n bangin for a lot longer than I've been dabblin.  The politics and 'rattan' measuring just turns folks like me off.  I wanna bang sticks with as many folks as I can.  Its the only way I see me getting as full a picture as I can.

When I have the $$ and time, I have every intent of hitting events put on by everyone.  Just seems more fun that way, ya'know?

:asian:


----------



## Cruentus

> _Originally posted by WhoopAss _
> *Chad really hit on the nail in his last post. I really feel like that all the debating that has been going on is hollow.  I feel that all the debates and the Symposium will not really do anything to resolve  any of the issues. As Chad said, the future of the art lies with the various groups teaching it. Find a group that you like and go with the flow. To be honest, I really am tired of all the debate regarding who's who in Modern Arnis. The Symposium isn't going to change anybody's minds. I think all of this is really pointless.
> 
> Take care,
> Brian *



UH-OH!!!!!!!!

Brian! You used the "S" word! TWICE!

I can hear the Doctor lurking now...... 

Brace yourselves everyone; we are about to be hit with a huge, objecting post! :redeme:


----------



## Bob Hubbard

Paul, 

you be nice.  

I'd hate to have to have you pretzel me as I attempt to put ya over my knee.


----------



## Cruentus

I want to just come out and say that there is a repeating pattern occuring here. 

1. Someone starts a thread on something non-confrontational.

2. Like a wave of fire, flames start rising, and arguements and disagreements ensue.

3. Then someone says something like, "Hey, does all this really matter. Lets just move forward and blah bla blah!"

4. Then everyone else says: "Blah bla baah blah; I agree!!!!"

5. Then the thread calms down or gets locked. Only for it all to start up again in a different thread at a different time.

The question is; WHY DOES THIS OCCUR?

The reason is because there is too much to "argue" about. In other words, there are still a lot of unanswered questions out there for a lot of people.  There is too much being "claimed" as well, with many doubts to the truth of such matters. Until many of these questions get answered, we are doomed to continue our cycle of behavior.

I have been moving forward, as have many of you. This isn't going to put an end to disagreements, though. Questions need to be answered.

This is unfortunate but true. Hopefully, in time, people will come clean, and there will be no more arguements. I hope I live to see the day.....




 :asian:


----------



## Cruentus

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *Paul,
> 
> you be nice.
> 
> I'd hate to have to have you pretzel me as I attempt to put ya over my knee.
> 
> *



:rofl:


----------



## dearnis.com

> . Then someone says something like, "Hey, does all this really matter. Lets just move forward and blah bla blah



Well, wait till I say a bit about how we should move forward.  Honestly I am just sick of hearing about everything Professor told eveyone while he was on his death bed.  Look, we all know he had the gift of taking a room full of people and making each person feel like they were the most special one in that room.  that was his magic, and the secret to his skill as a teacher.  What I have had it with is "I know the truth"  " No, I do!"  "No, me, me, me."
It cheapens his memory.



> This is unfortunate but true. Hopefully, in time, people will come clean, and there will be no more arguements. I hope I live to see the day.



I hope you do too.  But I wont hold my breath.  

Note to the dense: not an attack on Paul.


----------



## Cruentus

Well said again Chad! All the bickering does get tiring after awhile, that's for sure.

Like I said, I hope we can solve it all sooner then later.


----------



## Dan Anderson

> _Originally posted by WhoopAss _
> *I feel that all the debates and the Symposium will not really do anything to resolve  any of the issues.
> 
> The Symposium isn't going to change anybody's minds. I think all of this is really pointless.
> 
> Take care,
> Brian *



Brian, 
The Symposium is going to be a joint seminar, not an issue solvent.  Chad's post is a good one as well as Paul's _Evolution of a thread_ post.  The discussions are interesting as they do really bring up good points amongst the flames.  These points do lead to resolution, even if it is internal.

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## Brian Johns

> _Originally posted by Dan Anderson _
> *Brian,
> The Symposium is going to be a joint seminar, not an issue solvent.  Chad's post is a good one as well as Paul's Evolution of a thread post.  The discussions are interesting as they do really bring up good points amongst the flames.  These points do lead to resolution, even if it is internal.
> 
> Yours,
> Dan Anderson *



I understand your point of view on the Symposium thing.  I just wanted to point out that the Symposium is not a problem solver. Some folks appear to give the impression that they think it does.

I just want to reiterate that all the debates is really going nowhere and is pointless for the reason that we are all with the groups that we are happy with.

Hey, I just posted for the 200th time !! Do I get a beer for this ?  

Take care,
Brian


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

> _Originally posted by WhoopAss _
> *I understand your point of view on the Symposium thing.  I just wanted to point out that the Symposium is not a problem solver. Some folks appear to give the impression that they think it does. *



Agreed. :asian:


----------



## David Hoffman

I would like to add that am in agreement with most of what my old friend Chad has to say. I also wish to point out a few things from personal knowledge. Randi Schea does not interpret his position as being the successor in terms of ultimate skill or knowledge. He refers to himself as successor within the IMAF. This very humble representation has much to support it. Randi began the year after me, twenty years ago, and was a long term student and confident of Professor. Randi was the chairman prior to Professors illness. 

However, my sense of loyalty does not allow me to agree with the notion that what Professor wished for the future is not valid. The document outlining the leadership board was prepared well in advance of Professors falling ill. It was consistent with what was said to, and reported in this forum by, Dieter, Tim, Dan, Dan Mc., Brian and in private conversations I have had with Doug and others. It was the culmination of more than a decade of planning. I have asked for people to please be patient until I can make this public. Apparently patience is impossible in the internet age. I expect this document, once verified, proven and made public, will lead to a way forward for all of us to be happy with and result in harmony in our Modern Arnis family, if such a thing is possible. I am beginning to doubt if this will in fact be possible as, despite my reasonable request for patience and to have a pause, there is already heated debate on something none of you have seen! 

Further I see the idea put forward that If Professors wishes are proven and made known it makes no difference because I think a different way and I support so and so. Well that is your right. For my part, I adhere to the Budo code of respect for my teacher first and foremost. I consider my teaches wishes to be a sacred trust. I truly believe that most of my peers in the art share this belief.

As it is uncontested that I was Professors vice-president and a Modern Arnis Datu with twenty years of service, is it not reasonable that I ask for patience and the benefit of the doubt? There will be ample opportunity for debate and interpretation once I have fully gathered and made public the information I, regrettable, alluded to in my comments to my peers Dan and Dieter. At that point, those who wish to follow their own agendas will still be free to do so. Those who wish to respect Professors wishes will also be free to continue to do so. The rest, and indeed all of us, will at least have the benefit of the full story.

Regarding the Symposium. I think it is a good thing for various instructors, including those who broke away ten or more years ago, to get together to share their knowledge. These people have a lot to teach us about their own learning from Professor and their individual development of the art within their art. It matters not if they went their own way during Professors lifetime or have different agendas now. If we do not make everyone with experience comfortable sharing their knowledge, we are in danger of losing their precious information! Ive known Jerome since back in the day, and I dont think he is returning after ten years absence to compete with the self proclaimed or legitimate leaders. I think Jerome is sincere in trying to provide a forum for the different alternative arnis organizations. I regret that his Symposium is being portrayed as a confusium. At least a half dozen of those on the documents Professor left outlining the future board are on the instructors list Ive seen. Others, such as Rocky and Jerome are a blast from the past and I think it is great that they are getting together to teach.

Datu David Hoffman


----------



## Dan Anderson

> _Originally posted by WhoopAss _
> *Hey, I just posted for the 200th time !! Do I get a beer for this ?
> 
> Take care,
> Brian *



If I ever meet you, I'll cover the first beer.

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## Brian Johns

> _Originally posted by Dan Anderson _
> *If I ever meet you, I'll cover the first beer.
> 
> Yours,
> Dan Anderson *



Make it a Sam Adams or a microbrew.  

Take care,
Brian


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

:deadhorse

Get my point?


----------



## Brian Johns

> _Originally posted by Renegade _
> *:deadhorse
> 
> Get my point? *




I think that I need a few beers in order to view that dead horse a little more clearly.

:rofl: 


Take care,
Brian


----------



## norshadow1

> _Originally posted by WhoopAss _
> *I understand your point of view on the Symposium thing.  I just wanted to point out that the Symposium is not a problem solver. Some folks appear to give the impression that they think it does.
> 
> I just want to reiterate that all the debates is really going nowhere and is pointless for the reason that we are all with the groups that we are happy with.
> 
> Hey, I just posted for the 200th time !! Do I get a beer for this ?
> 
> Take care,
> Brian *



Debate is not pointless unless you have nothing to learn from it. Debate becomes pointless when it degrades to arguement rather that dialog. This happens when people stop listening and start insisting that their way is the only way. Questions that are not answered clearly or consistantly lead to more questions. All of this arguement and controversy makes people involved Modern Arnis look like crabs in a barrel. 

The Symposium will not eliminate the problems plaguing Modern Arnis, and I don't think nobody realistically expects that.  It would seen that more people share an optimistic opinion of the Symposium than do not, and it is a safe bet that everyone in attendace will come away from the event having learned something about Modern Arnis, themselves and each other. Not everyone will leave with a warm fuzzy, but that was often the case with many of the Professor's camps.  

At the very least everyone there will have the opportunity to see the various "slants on Remy's art". If any of the instructors are full of baloney then that will be eveident to all. Conversely, if any of the instructors are truly outstanding it will be plainly seen as well. I would be prone to say that the "Symposium Bashers" do so because it wasn't their idea or an event that they just couldn't pull off in the first place. Hat's off to DocB for making it happen.

Yes, Renegade. We get your point. Perhaps you could reply with some more text rather than pictures.  

Lamont


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

> _Originally posted by norshadow1 _
> *Yes, Renegade. We get your point. Perhaps you could reply with some more text rather than pictures.
> 
> Lamont *



Sometimes less is more!


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by dearnis.com _
> *This really hits at the heart of the problem;
> . . .
> Successor to the art, or to a system?
> . . .
> Let's be honest; say a will comes out tomorrow naming a board of 25 (or 15 or 17 or 29 1/2; take your pick).  It isn't going to happen.  It just isnt.  The future of the art lies with the groups now teaching it, large and small.
> I think it is about time to forget about the past and look ahead. *



Chad,

Can I be nominated for the Half Position?  


Paul,


Blah Blah BLah, I might agree, 


Tim & Jerome, the Symposium will happen it will not resolve issues, it will allow people to train. I think we all agree onthis at this date and time. That might not be where it started, or what people hoped for, though. 

David,

Patience is a virture. You wish that from us? You have much hope .

Waiting is . . .  (* Fill in the blank *)

Brian, a micro brew might be in order.  



Enjoy Training and Life  It is a passion for almost all of us here. Some of us epxress ourselves one way. Otheres a different way. This makes us individuals. Yet to have a place such as this to offer us the chance to discuss or debate, to me is worth it. JUst rememebre to go ride your bke or play with your kids or teach a class. What ever it is that takes you to your happy place .


:asian:


----------



## Mao

Hey Rich,
 What's a virture? Ya' wanna know what takes me to my happy place? HHHMMMM??   
O.k., I'll stop.
MAO


----------



## DoctorB

> _Originally posted by Dan Anderson _
> *A couple of comments.  First I agree with DrB's four main premises for having the Symposium.  I also agree it is a thankless job to put it on so prior to even having the event, I'll be the first to thank him here in print.
> 
> On a totally different note, my condolences to DrB regarding the two deaths in his family.  I hope things are sorting out.  See you in Buffalo, Jerome.
> 
> Yours,
> Dan Anderson *



Hello Daan,

Thanks for your support of my four main premises regarding the Symposium.  Also, thank you for your expression of condolences.
The issues will take a long time to work out, but my immediate task is to get back on track with my life until more information is known.

Jerome


----------



## DoctorB

> _Originally posted by dearnis.com _
> *The future of the art lies with the groups now teaching it, large and small.
> I think it is about time to forget about the past and look ahead. *



Hello Chad,

That has always been my primary position.  It is well past the time to move forward.  The Symposium is just ONE method for getting that forward movement going.

Jerome Barber, Ed.D.


----------



## DoctorB

> _Originally posted by WhoopAss _
> *I feel that all the debates and the Symposium will not really do anything to resolve  any of the issues. The Symposium isn't going to change anybody's minds. I think all of this is really pointless.
> 
> Take care,
> Brian *



The Symposium was never presented as resolver of problems or to change anybody's mind.  The Symposium was orginally intended to put the contenders for leadership together at one time and place to give everyone in attendence an opportunity to see for themselves who really had the better and best skills in the art of Modern Arnis.  That mission has passed and the emphasis changed over time.  It is now an opportunity for people to come together, talk, share and exchange ideas.  It was NEVER intended to replace any group or groups.  

Jerome Barber, Ed.D.


----------



## DoctorB

> _Originally posted by David Hoffman _
> *
> 
> Regarding the Symposium. I think it is a good thing for various instructors, including those who broke away ten or more years ago, to get together to share their knowledge. These people have a lot to teach us about their own learning from Professor and their individual development of the art within their art. It matters not if they went their own way during Professors lifetime or have different agendas now. If we do not make everyone with experience comfortable sharing their knowledge, we are in danger of losing their precious information! Ive known Jerome since back in the day, and I dont think he is returning after ten years absence to compete with the self proclaimed or legitimate leaders. I think Jerome is sincere in trying to provide a forum for the different alternative arnis organizations. I regret that his Symposium is being portrayed as a confusium. At least a half dozen of those on the documents Professor left outlining the future board are on the instructors list Ive seen. Others, such as Rocky and Jerome are a blast from the past and I think it is great that they are getting together to teach.
> 
> Datu David Hoffman *



Thank you for your support regarding the Symposium, David.  This event is all about sharing.  I will disagree on one point... it does matter if people left recently or a decade ago.  Each had their own reasons for leaving. 

You are correct, I did not "return" to compete with anyone for leadership in Modern Arnis... I didn't want it in 1994 and still do not want it today, 2003.   I simply got tired of all of the trash talking about who was or was not a true and faithful leader in Modern Arnis.  I got tired of reading posts about who had the skill and knowledge to teach the art "correctly".  Therefore I proposed the Symposium concept.  Ultimately only one "contender" stayed the course and agreed to participate.  Therefore the Symposium mission was changed to "share and exchange".  I actually like the latter format better.  Some critics of the Symposium idea have not kept pace with the changes and are still re-acting to the past.  The "art within your art" is very tantilizing.  It leaves room for exploration and self growth.

"I think Jerome is sincere in trying to provide a forum for the different alternative arnis organizations. I regret that his Symposium is being portrayed as a confusium. At least a half dozen of those on the documents Professor left outlining the future board are on the instructors list Ive seen."

Well, well, well, I wonder just how many of the half dozen are also on Datu Kelly's list that was quoted from Real Fighters Interview, in another post some time back by Lamont.  

The underlying idea of the Symposium at this point in 
time is that Modern Arnis is greater than any single organizational interpetation.  The fact that the instructor base has crossed over most of the major divisional lines should be viewed as an asset, not a liability.  There will not be a new consensus leader emerging from the Symposium, but that was never a goal of mine in planning the event.

In most respects, this has been one of the most positive threads that I have seen on this forum since I joined.  It is time for Modern Arnis instructors to actually lead by moving forward because this is in reality the "Post-Professor Era".  Like it or not, the past can not be undone.  The problems are still within the people who are doing the art.  Therefore they have to step up, recognize where the problems lie, what the root causes are and resolve them.  Sometimes, the recognition of root causes is painful, but once understood, change is much easier to make.  The discussions and conversations of the Symposium will be as important as the instructional programs.

Jerome Barber, Ed.D.


----------



## Dan Anderson

> _Originally posted by DoctorB _
> *It is time for Modern Arnis instructors to actually lead by moving forward because this is in reality the "Post-Professor Era".  The discussions and conversations of the Symposium will be as important as the instructional programs.
> 
> Jerome Barber, Ed.D. *



I posted this quote as a separate thread but it applies here and the moving forward of Modern Arnis in it's next phase, the "Post Professor Era."

_Greatgrand Master Ed Parker wrote: 
When I am gone, I hope that people won't try to traditionalize my Art. I want you to always remember that Kenpo will always be the Art of Perpetual Change. If you remember this, then the Art will never become obsolete because it will change with the times. While the ignorant refuse to study and the intelligent never stop, we should always be mindful of the fact that our reward in life is proportionate with the contributions we make. A true Martial Artist is not one who fears change, but one who causes it to happen. To live is to change, and to obtain perfection is to have changed often. Progress is a necessity that is a part of nature. While it is true that casting the old aside is not necessary in order to obtain something new, we should study old theories not as a means of discrediting them, but to see if they can be modified to improve our present conditions. A word of advice, The humble man makes room for progress; the proud man believes he is already there."
Edmund Kealoha Parker Sr. _

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## David Hoffman

> _Originally posted by PAUL _
> *:erg: :anic:
> 
> Just to add my 2 cents regarding little "grandmaster" Nanoy or Kevin.
> 
> When I had Professor over my house in 2000, he and my little 13 year old brother Jimmy were screwing around with the canes (no serious training) and Professor grinned at me and said, "Faulino, your frother is ver-y good! He will be the next Grandmaster!" Then we all had a pretty good laugh.
> 
> This backs up Mr. Hoffmans point.
> 
> Professor had a habit of saying things to make people happy, and he often didn't intend people to take his words, or even actions as gospel.
> 
> Jimmy isn't a grandmaster anymore then those other two kids. To claim successorship or Grandmastership based off of a non-serious, on-the-side comment is ridicules. I feel bad for young McManus and Nanoy in this circumstance. It is not their fault that they are being crowned a false prince by influences who should know better.
> 
> Oh well....more crap to clog the toilet, I guess.
> :flushed: *



__________________
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously..."

Some things should be taken seriously paul, respect is one example.

Once again I must distance myself from your statements and say I find your words very insulting and disrespectful. Yes, I realize that you were trying to agree with me and substantiate something I had said. However, your interpretation in way off the mark. It is also very emotive and insulting. You use words false prince , more crap to clog the toilet and ridicules by which I think you mean ridiculous. My post was meant to add depth and clarity to the idea of Carlos (Nonoy) becoming the next Grand Master, by no means am I holding the idea up to ridicule as you clearly are; you who admit no direct knowledge of the events discussed!

This was not a case of screwing around with canes as with your little brother. Nor was it a non-serious on-the-side comment as you, who were not present, imply. Carlos had made a sincere and passionate effort to be re-united with his Grandfather and to learn his art. Professor was very, very pleased with this and gave specific instructions relating to Nanoys training. Furthermore, when the statement was made, which Senior Master Roland, Datu Dieter, Datu Kelly and I all relate in much the same words, it was not during a casual playtime encounter, as was the case with your little brother. It was during a historic family reunion and reconciliation, something which Carlos himself initiated and I followed up on and made possible, as did Datu Kelly. This was worked on over a period of months of effort and serious consideration. Those who understand Filipino culture will know that succession in arnis often skips a generation. Thus, the grandson, not the son, is usually the one who carries the family lineage. This was, of course, true in Professors case. Professor was the first born Grandson. Nonoy is Professors first born Grandson. This is a position of authority and honor in Filipino families. I was clear in outlining that Carlos has a long road to live up to this birthright. If Carlos is sincere in wanting to learn and follow in his fathers footsteps, and I believe he is, then I for one will teach him all I know. This, together with what Nanoy can learn from the other Datus, Masters of Tapi-Tapi, Senior masters, and Filipino masters, should help him make up for not having been trained directly. It is unkind and unfair to hold Carlos up to ridicule.

I have told you before, Paul, that I admire your sincerity. You obviously want your voice to be heard. On these forums, the leaders are those post the most. Bob has asked me if you might interview me for an article on the Datus of Modern Arnis. If you want to have your ideas and words accepted, you will have to show some basic respect. Not just for your seniors, but for everyone, young and old. First and foremost, you must respect yourself and think before you post. 

I ask that you not comment on my statements, either positively or negatively, unless you do so in a mature and respectful manner. And no Paul, Im not talking about age, Im talking about maturity, of which you are capable.

As regards to Professors grandson, the statement, so you will be the next Grandmaster? was made at a solemn family reunion and reconciliation during his final days. It was a very serious and solemn time. The statement, and it's implied nomination, holds both great promise and great challenge for Carlos. It does nothing to change Professors written leadership plan, but it certainly does add depth and potential to it. 

Professor also made a very clear and meaningful gesture at this meeting: 

He gave his grandson Carlos his Uniform!


Datu David Hoffman


----------



## norshadow1

> _Originally posted by David Hoffman _
> *__________________
> "No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously..."
> 
> ...yadda, yadda, yadda... (several lines deleted)
> 
> As regards to Professors grandson, the statement, so you will be the next Grandmaster? was made at a solemn family reunion and reconciliation during his final days. It was a very serious and solemn time. The statement, and it's implied nomination, holds both great promise and great challenge for Carlos. It does nothing to change Professors written leadership plan, but it certainly does add depth and potential to it.
> 
> Professor also made a very clear and meaningful gesture at this meeting:
> 
> He gave his grandson Carlos his Uniform!
> 
> 
> Datu David Hoffman *



So what exactly was the Professors written leadership plan? There seems to be a number of different versions. As someone who "was there"  you can enlighten us. A number of your posts seem to be of the "I've got a secret" type telling everyone that  you have the information and will publish it shortly...but now is not the time.  

Why not just put it out there and be done with it? What are you waiting for? There is a great deal of hearsay, speculation and spin circulating that it would seem necessary to open the books and set the record straight, if you do indeed hold the information that woud do so.

Lamont


----------



## norshadow1

> _Originally posted by David Hoffman _
> *__________________
> "No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously..."
> 
> ...I have told you before, Paul, that I admire your sincerity. You obviously want your voice to be heard. On these forums, the leaders are those post the most. Bob has asked me if you might interview me for an article on the Datus of Modern Arnis. If you want to have your ideas and words accepted, you will have to show some basic respect. Not just for your seniors, but for everyone, young and old. First and foremost, you must respect yourself and think before you post...
> 
> Datu David Hoffman *



In regards to showing respect; I think that guys like Paul might be prone to show you some more respect if your posts were a bit more substancial and informative. Many times it seems as though you are condescending to address the Modern Arnis community and holding back information that should be out there for all to see. 

It's just an observation, David.  Don't take it personally. It just seems like you started out telling the forum that they "don't have all the facts" and when you are asked for the facts (politely or otherwise) you skirt around the issue and try to redirect the conversation.  There's no need to talk in circles. If you know what they want to know address it. If you don't have the information say so.   

Lamont


----------



## norshadow1

In a great number of posts on this thread and a few others there is an agumentative pattern that Paul illustrated in one of his posts.  I too have noticed "patterns". 

I've noticed that many Modern Arnis "leaders" (by this I mean those that are in a position of authority in an organization) on this forum fall into one of three molds. The first is to talk in circles and attempt to redirect the conversation in another direction.  The problem with that is a lot gets said but nothing gets accomplished. 

Another is the "some people will never be satisfied with any answer, so it doesn't matter" approach.  This train of thought gets even less accomplished because you're not just refusing to communicate, you're refusing to listen as well. Nothing gets heard, no communication occurs and nothing is resolved. It's not just stifling the communcation process. It's contrary the creative model of thought that the Professor modeled for us all. 

The third is an approach is to "lurk" and occasionally communicate with a few words and some pictures. Why not just grunt and paint on the wall? Seriously though, at least this approach makes you the master of your unspoken word; by minimizing what you say you minimize the risk of saying something that you might regret later. It's a safe practice, but still hinders the communication process and makes it seem like you're afraid to say something. 

Am I correct in assuming that this forum was created for the purpose of sharing information? 

Lamont


----------



## David Hoffman

> _Originally posted by norshadow1 _
> *So what exactly was the Professors written leadership plan? There seems to be a number of different versions. As someone who "was there"  you can enlighten us. A number of your posts seem to be of the "I've got a secret" type telling everyone that  you have the information and will publish it shortly...but now is not the time.
> 
> Why not just put it out there and be done with it? What are you waiting for? There is a great deal of hearsay, speculation and spin circulating that it would seem necessary to open the books and set the record straight, if you do indeed hold the information that woud do so.
> 
> Lamont *



Hello Lamont,

I regret giving the appearance that I am holding a taunting secret. This is not my intention. The existence of the written leadership plan just slipped out in some words I addressed to Dan and Dieter.  Then with all the questions I felt I had to give some advance information to justify my request for a little patience. For legal and fiduciary reasons I can not say more at this point. I have addressed this in detail in my earlier post. The courts in New England work frustratingly slow. This has been a difficult process full of delay and frustration! Presently, I am in the final stages and will soon be able to make this information public. Please understand, I did not intend to bring it up prematurely, it is similar legally to when a soldier is shot, the next of kin must be notified before the name is published. I am bound by similar rules. 

As you say, I was there, and I do intend to enlighten you. As I have never taken a position hurtful to anyone in Modern Arnis, have no private agenda and am well known as Professor's close confident, I feel entitled to ask again for patience. You will also note: I have given up my active voting position in the Federation in order to be impartial when I address this issue. I would not do so if I expected much more delay.


----------



## Mao

quote:
 Another is the "some people will never be satisfied with any answer, so it doesn't matter" approach. This train of thought gets even less accomplished because you're not just refusing to communicate, you're refusing to listen as well. Nothing gets heard, no communication occurs and nothing is resolved. It's not just stifling the communcation process. It's contrary the creative model of thought that the Professor modeled for us all. 

Norshadow1,
 I am the one who said this, so I guess your addressing me. I never said "so it doesn't matter", further, I'm not refusing to communicate. I am happy to do so if there is actually some communication. There needs to someone actually LISTENING for there to be communication. I am also willing to listen if the issue hasn't already been addressed, redressed, again and  again with answers given clearly. Have you ever heard of "casting perl before swine"? As far as  "it's contrary the creative model of thought that the Professor modeled for us all", he would also "not entertain the barking dogs" after a while.
As for the information David has, he has said that he is bound by LEGAL issues at the moment, several times. Again, for there to be actual communication, someone has to be listening. Give the man the time he has asked for. I am aware of what he is undertaking and it aint easy. 
MAO


----------



## Dan Anderson

> _Originally posted by norshadow1 _
> *I too have noticed "patterns".
> 
> I've noticed that many Modern Arnis "leaders" (by this I mean those that are in a position of authority in an organization) on this forum fall into one of three molds. The first is to talk in circles and attempt to redirect the conversation in another direction.
> 
> Another is the "some people will never be satisfied with any answer, so it doesn't matter" approach.
> 
> The third is an approach is to "lurk" and occasionally communicate with a few words and some pictures. Lamont *



What about those of us who just answer the damned question straight away, Lamont.  Don't just delineate the naysayers, lurkers and redirectionists as the only ones!

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## DoctorB

> _Originally posted by David Hoffman _
> *Hello Lamont,
> 
> I regret giving the appearance that I am holding a taunting secret. This is not my intention. The existence of the written leadership plan just slipped out in some words I addressed to Dan and Dieter.  Then with all the questions I felt I had to give some advance information to justify my request for a little patience. For legal and fiduciary reasons I can not say more at this point. I have addressed this in detail in my earlier post. The courts in New England work frustratingly slow. This has been a difficult process full of delay and frustration! Presently, I am in the final stages and will soon be able to make this information public. Please understand, I did not intend to bring it up prematurely, it is similar legally to when a soldier is shot, the next of kin must be notified before the name is published. I am bound by similar rules.
> 
> As you say, I was there, and I do intend to enlighten you. As I have never taken a position hurtful to anyone in Modern Arnis, have no private agenda and am well known as Professor's close confident, I feel entitled to ask again for patience. You will also note: I have given up my active voting position in the Federation in order to be impartial when I address this issue. I would not do so if I expected much more delay. *



Hello David,

For a number of people who have never gone through the legal details of handling a will and the probate process, there is always the notion "that something is not right."  Given these key words from your reply to Lamont:

"For legal and fiduciary reasons I can not say more at this point. I have addressed this in detail in my earlier post. The courts in New England work frustratingly slow. This has been a difficult process full of delay and frustration! Presently, I am in the final stages and will soon be able to make this information public. Please understand, I did not intend to bring it up prematurely, it is similar legally to when a soldier is shot, the next of kin must be notified before the name is published. I am bound by similar rules. "

I believe that everyone needs to back up and just wait.  There is a "legal gag order" that accompanies probate procedures in most if not all states, so it is necessary for those wanting answers to wait a bit longer.

It is also imperative that the pertinent comments of Paul, Lamont and others with regard to many promises being made, many titles being issues and too many conflicting accounts about what was allegedly said by Professor, has to be recognized and acknowledged.

It does not do anyone any good to try and pretend that Professor did not engage in making conflicting statements.  That is precisely part of the problem that contributes to the dis-unity in Modern Arnis.  Totally unity will never be achieved, but the divisons are harder and more rigid than they need to be and Professor played a major role in creating those divisions.  A number of people know the truth from their own experiences and they will acknowledge it privately, but never publicly.

The will's contents will be helpful to some people but it will undoubtly open another can of worms for some others.  Good luck, David, because you have unenviable burden of announcing the details of Professor's will.  The messenger is always at risk of being among the first causualties.

Jerome Barber, Ed.D.


----------



## Dan Anderson

> _Originally posted by DoctorB _
> *The messenger is always at risk of being among the first causualties.
> 
> Jerome Barber, Ed.D. *



David,
*Duck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## Cruentus

I only need to say 2 things regarding your post.....

1. I seem to be misunderstood. This often happends on the net. I admit, I often do not think when I post; this should be evident in my gramatical and spelling errors. Let me make myself more clear.

In my post I was not trying to discount what I am sure was a very powerful and emotional family reunion. I am not trying to be hurtful towards Remys children or grandson; although I realize that with little adages like "false prince," (however creative and fun they may be to say) are probably not appropriate given the circumstance.

All that I was showing in my example with my little brother was how Professor would often say something to someone, and it would get twisted around to fit an agenda of some sort. I am sure that Professor said a lot of heartfelt things to Nanoy. I am sure it was a very emotional time. I am sure that Professor would love for his children, and his grandson to carry on his legacy. His children have been doing just that, in their own way, and I think that is great.

I also would think that it would be great if Nanoy became a Modern Arnis Grandmaster. I am sure that Professor expressed this as well. Like you, I would show him everything I know if given the opportunity. However, I think that considering that Nanoy has had very little time to develop his art, it would be a bit premature to say "Professor intended for Nanoy to be his successor." "A" successor I can see, but "the" successor I cannot. Especially when considering the fact that many heartfelt things regarding "succeeding the art" were said to non-family members as well.

So, once again, we have a case of Professor saying one thing, and others twisting this around to mean something different. This is all I need to say regarding the matter.

2. Internet posting is quite a bit different then article writing. One is a clearly thought out process with clear intent; the other is not. I want you to download the 1st issue of the E-zine "MartialTalk Magazine" here, and read my introduction to my interview with Manong Ted Buot. The actual interview will follow in the next few issues, with a conclusion in issue #4. This is a 4 part series.

You will see how I write there, and this will allow you to judge my ability to write an article better then reading my posts here. You will see that when I write about modern arnis, my intent is to clearly show different viewpoints that are out there, and I allow the reader to make their own conclusions. When I write on the internet, I often already have MY CONCLUSIONS formulated, which I then attempt to express and discuss. There is quite a difference between the two.

The "Interview with the Datu's" series is one that will not be complete without you. My intent in the series is to get a diversity in expression and point of view from the 6 Datu's; the article will be designed to be positive in nature, however "the interviewee" will determine through their own expression how positive they would like to keep it. This will lend the chance for all of the Datus to get their voices heard in print.

So, please do not let "internet disagreements" or "disputes" prevent us from doing a positive thing for the art. This series will be a positive thing, I think.

Hopefully I have made my self a bit more clear, in a less beligerent manner.

Your friend in the arts,
Paul Janulis


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

Yes the will exists. To my knowledge there were 3 made. Ive seen 1 & 3, but not 2. They where written by the following:

1. David Pajak (sp) - Buffalo, NY
2. Brett Salafia - Newington, CT
3. Kevin Black - Buffalo, NY

They way I got to see them is that the Presas family showed them to me while I visited with them at thier home in October of 2001. In addition the 3rd will was started in my house and finished in Michael Bates home. I didnt get to see them until after Remys passing, but he did announce the International Board at the 2001 Orlando Camp. 

As I recall there was about 30 names of people who would form a corporation after Remys passing and this would be the governing body for Modern Arnis. Im summarizing but for the most part that was it.


----------



## Dan Anderson

And then there is the question of which is in force?

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

It would be the 3rd one.


----------



## Dan Anderson

Where is it/who has it?  Is an American notarized will legal in Canada?  Who is the executor?  Has it been followed?

Note: In reality, *none* of this is my business but I thought I'd post the questions before anyone else did.

Personally, I have no feelings about the will, one way or another, outside of curiousity in something which does not involve me.

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## Cruentus

but based on my work with estate planning, it was my understanding that Professors "American" will was not legal due to these reasons compiled together:

1. Professor was a Canadian Citizen (I could be wrong, but I believe had duel citizenship).

2. He died in Canada (a minor factor if you had dual citizenship)

3. He was legally married in Canada to a Canadian citizen (Ivette I believe was Canadian. A legal marriage in Canada makes #2 a more important factor). It was the marriage and 2 children that made the American will obsolete, I believe. I believe Canadian Law would have been looking at the best interest of the children (Ivettes).

Now, I could be wrong because I don't know all the facts. I can't work backwards on stipulation. If I have all of the facts, I could find out from my estate planning attorneys in a heartbeat. Because I am not directly involved, I have not had the urge to do so.

PAUL


----------



## norshadow1

> _Originally posted by Dan Anderson _
> *What about those of us who just answer the damned question straight away, Lamont.  Don't just delineate the naysayers, lurkers and redirectionists as the only ones!
> 
> Yours,
> Dan Anderson *



It's not the straight shooters that are hindering the process, Dan. It's the people with the blinders on that I'm referring to. Don't feel left out because you don't fit any of those negative patterns.

Lamont


----------



## Cruentus

If my elephant memory serves me correctly rolleyes: ), I believe you are an attorney. Am I correct?

If you have any experience in estate planning, perhaps you could enlighten us about the law better then my attempt. I know it's kind of a tricky situation being that we are dealing with an "international" situation (Canada and U.S.), but hey, its worth me asking.

Sorry to call you out....I just noticed that you were browsing this forum when I typed my last post! 

 

Paul Janulis

P.S. I would ask "Icepick," AKA Kevin Black who is a member here but who hasn't been on this forum in a while, considering that not only is he an attorney, but he is THE attorney who wrote up that 3rd will. But I am afraid that now that he is in the CIA, if he told us he'd have to kill us!  :rofl:


----------



## norshadow1

> _Originally posted by Mao _
> *quote:
> Another is the "some people will never be satisfied with any answer, so it doesn't matter" approach. This train of thought gets even less accomplished because you're not just refusing to communicate, you're refusing to listen as well. Nothing gets heard, no communication occurs and nothing is resolved. It's not just stifling the communcation process. It's contrary the creative model of thought that the Professor modeled for us all.
> 
> Norshadow1,
> I am the one who said this, so I guess your addressing me. I never said "so it doesn't matter", further, I'm not refusing to communicate. I am happy to do so if there is actually some communication. There needs to someone actually LISTENING for there to be communication. I am also willing to listen if the issue hasn't already been addressed, redressed, again and  again with answers given clearly. Have you ever heard of "casting perl before swine"? As far as  "it's contrary the creative model of thought that the Professor modeled for us all", he would also "not entertain the barking dogs" after a while.
> As for the information David has, he has said that he is bound by LEGAL issues at the moment, several times. Again, for there to be actual communication, someone has to be listening. Give the man the time he has asked for. I am aware of what he is undertaking and it aint easy.
> MAO *




Now there you go being reactive rather than proactive; OK, you didn't say "it doesn't matter". Someone closely associated with you did, and at times you implied it without spelling it out.  Please consider that what you feel is a clear answer to a question may not be so clear to others, and may lead to more questions.  In that case perhaps instead of addressing and redressing an issue you  might try to LISTEN to the questions that are being posed and consider why they are being asked. Take the time to find out why the "dogs are barking". The Professor had a way to deal with barking dogs. He wouldn't always address an issue directly, but he would throw them a bone to quiet them down.  You wouldn't be casting pearls before swine by being open and approachable. You would be helping others understand more and in the process you would be showing others how a leader carries himself and shares of himself with others; just like Remy did.


And please, cal me Lamont.

Lamont


----------



## norshadow1

> _Originally posted by David Hoffman _
> *Hello Lamont,
> 
> I regret giving the appearance that I am holding a taunting secret. This is not my intention...
> 
> ...As you say, I was there, and I do intend to enlighten you. As I have never taken a position hurtful to anyone in Modern Arnis, have no private agenda and am well known as Professor's close confident, I feel entitled to ask again for patience. You will also note: I have given up my active voting position in the Federation in order to be impartial when I address this issue. I would not do so if I expected much more delay. *




Fair enough, David. I'll get off your back. Hope you didn't take offense at anything I had to say.

Lamont


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

> _Originally posted by PAUL _
> *P.S. I would ask "Icepick," AKA Kevin Black who is a member here but who hasn't been on this forum in a while, considering that not only is he an attorney, but he is THE attorney who wrote up that 3rd will. But I am afraid that now that he is in the CIA, if he told us he'd have to kill us!  :rofl: *



It was the FBI not the CIA. Both Modarnis and Icepick did legal work for Remy. Both are restricted to say anything due to client/attorney confidentiality.  Even though Remy has passed, the will still has not been executed. Also there would be some ethical issues for them to release information on the will to people other than those who were named in it.  As much as it may shed light onto the situation, please respect their position and not pester them for this information.  If there is  time that they can share the information, it is up to them and them alone.


----------



## Brian Johns

> _Originally posted by Renegade _
> *It was the FBI not the CIA. Both Modarnis and Icepick did legal work for Remy. Both are restricted to say anything due to client/attorney confidentiality.  Even though Remy has passed, the will still has not been executed. Also there would be some ethical issues for them to release information on the will to people other than those who were named in it.  As much as it may shed light onto the situation, please respect their position and not pester them for this information.  If there is  time that they can share the information, it is up to them and them alone. *



I have to say that Renegade is certainly correct on this issue and that it would probably not be fair to put Modarnis or Icepick on the spot. It would behoove those on this forum to wait until Datu Hoffman comes forth with his information.

Take care,
Brian


----------



## Cruentus

I had no idea Modarnis was personally involved in any of the "will" stuff. I don't know his real name off hand. I was inquiring for a broad opinion, not realizing that he was directly involved.

Sorry modarnis! Didn't mean to put you on the spot.  Big Oops!

In terms of Kevin Black: CIA, FBI, whatever....same thing. 2 Government orgs who are currently working with UFO's on Dominating the world, and trying to cover it up.

I've seen X-files....I know waas-up! :xwing: 

Seriously, I understand that Kevin has Attorney/client privilage issues and couldn't ACTUALLY post something regarding the will; even if it was deemed as "invalid" it would cause ethical issues.

I was only kidding about Kevin! You guys take me way too seriously! 

Probably stupid for me to kid regarding an issue that could jeprodize someones position. I stand corrected, as I often do!


----------



## modarnis

Tim is correct.  Attorney client privilege precludes me from divulging information, even after a client is deceased.  Attorney client privilege is absolute.  In this case it is further compounded by the fact that the Professor trusted me with his personal affairs, something I cherish more than any rank I ever earned from him.   As Tim also pointed out, the Professor divulged the full contents of the Modern Arnis plan at the Orlando Wintercamp in 2001.  I will speak generally about trust and estate law though.

While Tim was correct that myself and others in the past constructed wills for Professor Presas, he was in fact the author.  It is the testator (fancy word for the guy who's making the will) who directs the disposition of his assets through the legal process.  This is carried out through an executor.  The executor is a person named in the will to carry out these wishes.

The last properly executed will is the one which has legal effect.  You could execute a will every day or every month or every year, and the last one properly executed is the one that is binding.  Depending on the jurisdiction, a will needs 2 or 3 impartial witnesses who can attest that the person executing the document is of sound mind.

In the trusts and estates world, sound mind relayes to knowledge of a persons tangible assets and a desire to disperse them.  It is not a high level competency exam as in criminal law.  A person must also be free from undue influence.  Undue influence is the holding a gun to someone's head to make them sign a document example.

The Canada versus US thing is an interesting twist, kind of like a law school exam.  Probate courts give huge emphasis to testator intent.  Testaor intent is what would the person have wanted to have happen with his property.  Even absent a properly executed will, some documentation that gives rise to this intent would influence a probate court's decision.

In our specific example of the Professor, assuming for the sake of argument that either 1.  none of the 3 wills were properly executed, or 2. that the will is invalid in Canada, courts would likely find a high degree of testator intent from the Professor attemting to create a dispositive document.

Of course if the courts disregard this entirely, he would have died intestate (without a will).  Most US states have an intestate plan that probate courts use to disperse assets.  Here in Connecicut, spouse first, then children.  Absent spouse or children, then parents.  Absent parents then siblings...and so on until there is nobody left, then the state keeps it.

Time will sort the probate matters out.  Until then, I am content to do what the Profesor would want  me to do:  train hard and be happy.

Respectfully,

Brett Salafia


----------



## Brian Johns

Well said, Brett.




Take care,
Brian


----------



## Cruentus

> _Originally posted by WhoopAss _
> *Well said, Brett.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Take care,
> Brian *



Agreed! Thank you for the input!


----------



## Dan Anderson

Brett,

Very well stated for those of us without legal background, explaining enough for us to get the idea without overdoing it.  Train hard and be happy - good way to put it.

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## arnisador

Thanks *modarnis* for that primer!


----------



## Mao

Yes, I was being reactive. The situation begged a reaction. As for LISTENING, I had been. As for my answer not being clear, with regards to the situation I was referencing, I answered more than a couple times, another person answered him in an similar manner. This was not enough so another suggestion was made. I have discussed this with the person involved and it being handled. How did this happen. CLEAR communication, on the phone, complete with listening and discussion and everything. I am willing and able to entertain questions and discussion. Sometimes I am reactive, sometimes proactive. soemtimes I just play around. As for barking dogs, I don't consider them so untill an issue has been addressed, redressed and I have tried to help. After that if there is still antagonism, it sounds strangely like barking. Those who know me well know how very open and sharing of myself I can be. But I won't be abused. As this part of this thread is getting ugly. I am finished with it. I hope we can discuss intelligently in times to come.
MAO


----------

