Chimczuk Part 2 - Why so harsh of a post
Confession time. The previous post was unnecessarily harsh. Don’t know if Dr. David Wonham is still Reading
One thing that struck me in our conversation is I really believe he has benevolent intentions. When I made my case several times about why I thought holding the name was wrong, it was like he wasn’t arguing with me, he simply could not see what I was saying. It was like his good intentions were simply blinding him to how others could see it.
Sorry but I wanted to give him a taste of what is to come. If this post bothered him. Think of what the WIndsor Star and Mayor and council will do if he tries to thwart any plan they endorse. they’re gonna label him public enemy number 1 and like my father used to say, never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel
Just like he anointed himself keeper of Chimczuk donations, I am anointing myself the guy in charge of giving him a wake up call. Others who jump to his defence because hes a good guy aren’t doing him any favours, they’re simply endangering him to future abuse he may face.
Just like his reason for the trademark, better him than someone worse. Well better he hear this from me (whats my readership, like 6?) than someone else with a readership of tens of thousands
I wish you well Dr Wonham,
Post Feedback
Mark, you are not as malevolent as I thought from your postings. If you have read the brochure that I gave you ( or visited our website ) you will see exactly why we are apprehensive. We just want a viable Museum, and not a wasted money project. Willing to talk with you or anyone else at any time. David (your #7 reader). David.
Will send you, separately, my response to your 2nd blog.
David Wonham’s response followed by mine
Just loved Mark Boscariol’s response !
His hilariously inane ramblings, admitted unsuitable language, his self-appointed spokesman for “Windsorites” and his ad hominem insults, totally justify the actions taken by Chimczuk Museum Inc. to protect the funds from irresponsible use.
Joseph Chimczuk left his estate to the “Corporation of the City of Windsor” , not to “Windsorites”, and Chimczuk Museum Inc.(”anointed” by the Province of Ontario). “Chimczuk Museum” (”anointed” by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office ), and the Registered Charity ” 81604-8078″ ( “anointed” by the Canadian Internal Revenue Agency ) are ensuring that the funds will be used fruitfully and in accord with Joseph Chimczuk’s will, and that the “Corporation of the City of Windsor” demand that the Chimczuk Museum viability be assured by the presence of a sound business plan.
We will not allow the Chimczuk Museum name to be used on faulty premises, and therefore fail because of lack of proper planning.
I believe that Chimczuk Museum Inc. ( not “David Wonham”) has quite rightly assumed the position of “watchdog” to secure proper use of his legacy, to make sure that the Museum conforms to the stipulations of Joseph Chimczuk’s will.
We are eternally grateful for people like Mark Boscariol who demonstrate that our direction is sound, in that we are protecting the Windsor public from ignorance and the desire to squander the Chimczuk legacy stupidly.
I had thought that Mark ( admitting that he is not “that intelligent” ), as a purported businessman, would have appreciated the importance of our situation : all the more reason why we must continue to monitor the process.
David Wonham,
Executive Director, Chimczuk Museum Inc.
If you want to be involved in our effort, or just discuss it, feel free to call me.
David.( reader #7 )
P.S. : can we stop trading insults ?
I hope the second post clarified my intent although we still far apart on this issue.
The email you posted is different from the scaledown response
I take no offence to your reply as it was I who asked for it. I would like to print it in the scaledown blog unless you object. It is a fair response and would illuminate the situation to readers.
Hopefully one day you will find all the success in the world that you too can leave money to the corporation of city of Windsor.
and Hopefully you will be absent minded enough in the details that I can seize control over how it is used.
I hope that response wasn’t seen as trading insults. I vehemently disagree with someone exerting control over money’s left to the corporation of the city of Windsor who was unelected.
As flawed a process as democracy is, it beats the hell out of an unelected person dictating to the corporation of the city of Windsor (which I view as “YOU AND ME”) telling me what is and is not good for me. With no recourse
By the way, who is “WE”. The chimczuk museum inc lists no other names. Lots of “we’s”, “our’s” and “Us’s” but only David Wonham’s name. What qualifications do “we” and “us” and “ours” have to exert control over this moneys’? Even if they did have some sort of qualifications, anyone here vote for them
Lack of transparancy which again shows what the problem is.
But this is ok with the square guys? This is how they would have things run? Don’t like the politicians, have the unelected and the bridge owner determine public policy
who’s we?
Even now I don’t understand why the names of others in the chimczuk museum inc organization are not listed on the website? what are the requirements and process are to apply to become part of Chimczuk Museum Inc? Can anyone apply to be a board member? how long are the terms of the board members? Minimum and maximum number of them? are meeting minutes kept? are meeting minutes public? when is the next meeting of the board? is it open to the public? What motions or policies have been passed by the board?
Even as you disagree with me, you may want to rethink this lack of transparency.
I have given this last comment about 10 minutes of thought, what else has been overlooked?