Cashplus

[bucket]

And furthur to the n.d. mill needing grain.

Why are none of our so called farm groups lobbying under the nafta trade rules to allow canadian grain to this market. This would be called protectionist and is not allowed under NAFTA????

any comments from the farm groups???

[chaffmeister]

So Vader – you’ve been “outed”. Anyone who’s been reading or posting here for a while knows who you are. Being “exposed” in no way gives you the moral high ground to disparage other posters here simply because you don’t know who they are. I don’t believe that you have any more credibility than anyone else here simply because we know who you are.

In fact, you have less. As a CWB director, it’s your responsibility to provide honest and meaningful responses to farmers. But you’ve really dropped the ball, Rod. It makes it pretty tough for you to have any credibility when it is apparent you have forgotten who you represent.

I don’t have to guess at Fransisco’s motives. I can see that all he is doing is asking questions. Questions that you refuse to answer. This, I have noticed, is a typical CWB response – don’t answer, divert attention to something else, question the credibility of the one asking the questions, even sneer at the question as if to say “why would anyone even ask such a question?”.

Because you are CWB director, you are held to a higher standard. We EXPECT credible and insightful answers. Not some rhetorical diatribe that some consultant advised you to say.

For example, you response to Fransisco’s questions was:

“If you are simply here to be a shit disturber and are not willing to invest the time and effort to get the answers to the questions that you ask then what is the point of all the questions?”

Now re-read it again. Slowly. I’ll help here. IF YOU’RE NOT WILLING TO INVEST THE TIME AND EFFORT TO GET THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS….THEN WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE QUESTIONS?

Now think about what you said. While he is asking questions, you try to ridicule him for not getting the answers to the questions !!!! What the hell do you think the questions are for?!! You're the one NOT giving the answers!

This takes CWB-rhetoric and diversion to a whole new low level.

Credibility or honour does not come from who you are. You've got it backwards. Who you are comes from credibility and honesty.

Telling the truth, integrity, standing up for justice (standing up for the other guy), and sticking to your morals and principles. Can you honestly say, Evader, that you are compliant with each and every one of these?

Asking questions you don’t like to answer, does not make the person asking the questions disingenuous. If you would answer them earnestly and honestly, you’d earn credibility. If you answered them at all, you’d earn a bit of respect. But you choose to do neither.

I really don’t care who Fransisco is. Or Eric. I don’t need to know them, who they might work for, or what their principles are because I can see they ask honest questions looking for simple truths. They may be “shit disturbers” – as you call them – but I see nothing wrong with their questions. I’ve never seen them back down from a good rigorous discussion. Something I can’t say about you, Evader. (Think about it for minute. The reason we all keep asking questions is because you (the CWB) keep failing to give good answers.)

I don’t even care who you are Evader. But I can tell from your postings and lack of credible or meaningful responses to reasonable questions that you are neither credible nor honourable.

Show some respect. Answer the questions. Earn that director's fee.

Earn some respect.

[Fransisco]

Rod/Vader said,
<blockquote>I don't care who you are. But as long as I don't know who you are you have no credibility or honor as far as I am concerned." <blockquote>

Francisco- Your first sentence here completely contradicts your second one. Which one is correct? I'm guessing by your tone its the second one.

If I gave you my real name and my permit book number would you then answer the questions that I have posted on this forum?

<blockquote>Rod/Vader said, "You might be some schill paid by some Multinational grain company to raise shit and promote lies." <blockquote>

Francisco- Rod, on page 29 of the PDF, page 27 of the the latest annual report it says that you got paid $52,500 by the CWB in the 2006-2007 time frame.

1. Does this mean that you are a paid 'shill' for the CWB who spreads 'shit' and promotes 'lies'?

2. Why do you believe that anyone else who buys grain should automatically be disqualified from the debate? Why are they not just as much entitled to their opinion as anyone else?

<blockquote>Rod/Vader said, "The numbers shown to the members of the Board of Directors of the CWB are <b>confidential</b>. If you were to canvass all 15 directors, and if their response to you was consistent, then certainly that would lend some credibility to what I say."</blockquote>

Fransisco- Well unfortunately Rod it doesn't work that way and I think you know it.

3. If you cannot put your evidence on the table to be independently verified by anyone and everyone then it is not credible evidence, for all practical purposes it doesn't even exist.

4. It is the evidence and the argument that matters not who is presenting it.

5. Farmers want to see the evidence Rod , they are tired of being told just to "trust you".

6. Those on the pro choice side of the CWB argument have never had a problem putting all of their evidence and the sources of that evidence on the table. They even ask that everyone double check it for themselves. Because of this their evidence is highly credible, because you hide yours behind 'confidentiality' it is has no credibility at all.

<blockquote>Rod/Vader said, "If you are simply here to be a shit disturber and are not willing to invest the time and effort to get the answers to the questions that you ask then what is the point of all the questions?"</blockquote>

Francisco- Rod, if you are just here to spread propaganda, empty rhetoric and call people you disagree with childish names instead of answering honest questions maybe you should refund farmers the $52,000 you got from them last year.

I am more than willing to invest the time to properly follow the evidence and I believe that many others are as well, but as long as you keep your evidence secret you and the CWB have no integrity on the economic side of this debate.

Simply put, you don't have a leg to stand on.

[bucket]

Vader

Who someone ask if they want answers from or about the cwb??

Seems illogical to ask a person from jri or viterra about the cwb. In other postings people and it doesn not matter who - asked some good questions and the cwb should answer them instead of insulting the person.

As for the shit disturber comment - that exactly what you are doing - starting a conversation with so called facts and not being able to back them up, then leaving and letting someone else to defend your or the cwb position. The cwb does rock and you are the first one to hide under that rock. Hopefully when the dynamite lites to blast that rock apart you are the last one to be seen or heard of again along with your leeching salary.

[Fransisco]

Oh the joy of having to use code to make ones point. Lets try this again...

Rod/Vader said,
<blockquote>I don't care who you are. But as long as I don't know who you are you have no credibility or honor as far as I am concerned." </blockquote>

Francisco- Your first sentence here completely contradicts your second one. Which one is correct? I'm guessing by your tone its the second one.

If I gave you my real name and my permit book number would you then answer the questions that I have posted on this forum?

<blockquote>Rod/Vader said, "You might be some schill paid by some Multinational grain company to raise shit and promote lies." </blockquote>

Francisco- Rod, on page 29 of the PDF, page 27 of the the latest annual report it says that you got paid $52,500 by the CWB in the 2006-2007 time frame.

1. Does this mean that you are a paid 'shill' for the CWB who spreads 'shit' and promotes 'lies'?

2. Why do you believe that anyone else who buys grain should automatically be disqualified from the debate? Why are they not just as much entitled to their opinion as anyone else?

<blockquote>Rod/Vader said, "The numbers shown to the members of the Board of Directors of the CWB are <b>confidential</b>. If you were to canvass all 15 directors, and if their response to you was consistent, then certainly that would lend some credibility to what I say."</blockquote>

Fransisco- Well unfortunately Rod it doesn't work that way and I think you know it.

3. If you cannot put your evidence on the table to be independently verified by anyone and everyone then it is not credible evidence, for all practical purposes it doesn't even exist.

4. It is the evidence and the argument that matters not who is presenting it.

5. Farmers want to see the evidence Rod , they are tired of being told just to "trust you".

6. Those on the pro choice side of the CWB argument have never had a problem putting all of their evidence and the sources of that evidence on the table. They even ask that everyone double check it for themselves. Because of this their evidence is highly credible, because you hide yours behind 'confidentiality' it is has no credibility at all.

<blockquote>Rod/Vader said, "If you are simply here to be a shit disturber and are not willing to invest the time and effort to get the answers to the questions that you ask then what is the point of all the questions?"</blockquote>

Francisco- Rod, if you are just here to spread propaganda, empty rhetoric and call people you disagree with childish names instead of answering honest questions maybe you should refund farmers the $52,000 you got from them last year.

I am more than willing to invest the time to properly follow the evidence and I believe that many others are as well, but as long as you keep your evidence secret you and the CWB have no integrity on the economic side of this debate.

Simply put, you don't have a leg to stand on.

[Fransisco]

There, that's much better.

[kryger]

Vader/Rod lost his credibility two weeks after he was first elected as a CWB director. He, along with Ritter, ran on marketing choice. Ritter changed his mind once elected and shortly after that he was named Chairman of the board. I always suspected he was offered a carrot to do a 180.

[kryger]

Vader
were my questions too hard? why ask who I am and avoid the questions??
hint, we graduated Directors college together.
As to your role as a director, the $25,000 plus that we as producers paid for you to attend this course was a total waste of money. No true corporate leadership did you learn, no respect for Canadian corporate governance as taught is being followed by yourself or other members of your board.
If I had in my previous role as a corporate director ever, spoke of matters from with in the board room, with out my boards approval I would be asked to leave or removed. Yet you and your board have no respect for board room confidentialness. And one wonders why the CWB is continually losing what respect it had world wide.
Once again Vader answer my questions!
Erik

[Fransisco]

I take it the $25,000 course was over and above the yearly salary and per diem numbers in the annual report?

[Vader]

eri, francisco, chaffmeister,

let me put it another way. Do I care who you are? How can I care? As long as you hide behind a pseudonym you don't exist. You can say anything you like without being held accountable.

Yes it is fair ball for you to ask questions. But you can't make any statements and be taken seriously.

I will say again. You could be fronting for a grain company, a chemical company, a railroad. Who knows what your motives are.

Do I need to answer your questions? Nope.

As a Director of the Canadian Wheat Board, I understand my role quite well. It is to set the long term vision of the CWB. It is to work in the best interest of the CWB.

I don't need to know if Busch contracted 40,000 tonnes or 140,000 tonnes. I don't need to know if the contract is one three way contract or three one way contracts. That is why we have staff. You want details. Ask the CWB staff. That is what they are paid for. My job is to ask questions, make sure there is a long term plan and that there are people in the building to carry out the plan.

What I post here on Agri-ville are my own opinions. The CWB governance structure erik is perhaps somewhat different than the boards that you sat on. Our bylaws actually give me the right to express my opinions. I can disagree with the other board members and I can say so.

If you think I have said something that is incorrect. You can say so here. I may respond. I may not. You may not be someone that I have any fiduciary duty to. You may be an enemy of the CWB. How would I know. Most of you seem to be mortal enemies of the CWB for ideoloical reasons.

Name calling? You mean because I called you shit disturbers. Perhaps. I would say that Parsley is the all time winner for juvenile name calling.

And by the way if names are not important why have I become Vader/Rod????

[Fransisco]

Okay, I will ask this one again. If I tell you who I am how many acres I run and my permit book number will you answer my questions and or authorize CWB staff to answer them?

Or am I still supposed to take a long walk off a short pier, in your opinion?

[FarmRanger]

"As a Director of the Canadian Wheat Board, I understand my role quite well. It is to set the long term vision of the CWB. It is to work in the best interest of the CWB."

"work in the best interest of the CWB"

Do the best interests of the CWB happen to overlap mine and the other 62% of designated area farmers?

[Fransisco]

Hmm, that brings up a good point Rod, can you please explain the hierarchy to us?

Is working in the best interest of the CWB at the top of the list or is it in the best interest of the farmers who elected you?

These two things are not one and the same.

[silverback]

At what point did the best interests of the liberal party of canada enter the equation Vader?

Day one? two?

Where are they on the priority scale right about now?

It is amazing how easily you could insert the borg storyline into these comments or the doctrine from a very large east European nation.

All that matters is the collective/party.

[chaffmeister]

<b><i>Do I need to answer your questions? Nope.</b></i>

That says it all.

Evader posts here ostensibly to forward his vision of the CWB, share his insights, and spread the "good news story" about the CWB.

What else could it be?

Every one of his posts are chalk full of nuggets about the CWB and how great a job its doing.

He then ends many posts with his inveterate "THE CWB ROCKS!!!"

Of course we think he posts here to defend the CWB. I'm certain that was the idea.

But apparently we are sadly mistaken.

<b><i>Do I need to answer your questions? Nope.</b></i>

When cornered with questions that he cannot answer, he simply folds, refusing to even entertain an answer as if to say "I don't know you so I don't need to talk to you".

You're right Rod, you don't need to answer anything. But you should remember a couple of things:

1. Other farmers who WANT you to answer our questions to defend the CWB are watching & reading, waiting for you to show leadership. When you refuse to answer, you give them k'niptions.

2. Every time you make a statement here on Agri-ville but don't follow through with a full earnest discussion (you know, by answering questions), you just weaken your position and make a joke of yourself.

I'm convinced that if you had a good answer to our questions that presented the CWB well, you'd respond. The fact that you refuse to respond simply sends the message to all readers that you can't answer in a manner that favour the CWB. So even when you don't answer, make no mistake - we get it.

I'm no political strategist, but I would certainly suggest a different approach.

People want answers.