posted 07-12-2006 03:42 PM         

I just saw the most recent copy of your newsletter. I felt it was nothing more than an advertisement for Don. The stand up thing to do would have been to offer T.V. equal time in the same newsletter. If T.V. declined, then your readers should be advised of that as well.

posted 07-12-2006 03:53 PM            

------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator
http://www.polygraphplace.com

posted 07-13-2006 10:07 AM            

During any election candidates state their cases, and others provide them the money and means to do so. If Ralph wants to support Don in any way he desires, why should anybody care? TV can reach the same audience here, but it appears from his prior posts he doesn't want to add anything.

quote:

---

Those of you who are active APA members and are interested in the welfare of our profession and the association already know me and what I stand for.

---

TV's standing on his prior statements, goals and accomplishments, which is his prerogative. From that statement, I understand he wouldn't want to write an article anyhow - unless he's changed his mind.

posted 07-13-2006 10:28 AM         

I am not attacking Ralph. It is his publication and he can print what ever he wants to. I just felt it would be in the best interest of everybody to have the opportunity to hear from both candidates on the issues at hand. Although TV has posted on this board, I am sure the news letter was a complete "suprise" to him. I sincerely doubt he was even offered an opportunity to write an article.
Ralph, ring in here if I am wrong!!

And just once again, I am not attacking Ralph. It is his news letter to print as he sees fit. I just disagree with him on this issue.

posted 07-13-2006 01:31 PM            

I found nothing in Don's letter that could be remotely classified as either an unprincipled criticism OR an unnecessarily aggressive and unfair remark directed at a defenseless person.

If the moderator of this board chooses to support or endorse a candidate for office, he is entitled to do so, but in the interest of fairness. I too would like to see the incumbent given access to the same forum for his agenda. I think we should have the opportunity to weigh what they both have to say. I was a bit put off by his statement,
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those of you who are active APA members and are interested in the welfare of our profession and the association already know me and what I stand for.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- because I think it does too little to encourage new APA members to become more involved,promotes "status quo" as a platform for office and makes me wonder if he considers the entire membership worth the time it would take to lay out his views. Candidacies should be more about look what I'm gonna do than look what I've already doen.

In order to establish his candidacy Don Kraphol has to identify a need for change. I think he has done so, as professionally and impersonally as possible. I can't see where anything he said deserves the connotation of "cheap shot".

I have the greatest respect for you based on our discussions on this board and I find choice of title for this topic odds with my perception of you.

------------------
but then, that's just one man's opinion

posted 07-13-2006 03:43 PM         

Thanks for your comments and I do appriciate them. All I am saying is that I felt it was not right for the news letter to come out in the final hour with a one sided view. I guess however, that is the "power of the press" and Ralph is certainly free to endorse who ever he wants to. I am not an APA member but as a Polygraph Chronicles reader, I would have liked to have heard from both sides.That's all.

Also, my post does not address the content of Don's article in any way.

Take care

Ted