(no subject)
Aug. 15th, 2008 12:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
furrbearFolks who have asked to have their Manhunt accounts closed have received the following response from Manhunt
Dear Member,
Thank you for contacting MANHUNT Customer Service.
Thank you for taking the time to express your concerns as we are always
happy to hear from our members.
Manhunt as a company has not and does not support any political
candidate in this or any previous election.
A statement from the founder and majority shareholder of MANHUNT
follows.
Sincerely,
Ryan
Manhunt Customer Service
STATEMENT FROM LARRY BASILE, FOUNDER AND MAJOR SHAREHOLDER OF MANHUNT
There has been a depiction this week of MANHUNT being Republican.
All my life, I have never voted to the right, and have always been
generous to 20th Century Democrats, Gay and Lesbian Advocates and
Defenders, HRC, and the NGLTF.
I was arrested at the Supreme Court and FDA in Act-Up actions, and was
the founder of the Grass Roots Gay Rights Fund, which over the years has
raised more than $800K.
I was the Treasurer of Out Week magazine, which was a powerful force in
its time.
I began giving Obama donations in March 2007, and I have sent several
checks that have yet to be reported. The hat and t-shirt I wear say
"Obama for President", as does the sign in front of my house. I refuse
to live in a country that is so marred by war and hate. To me, Barack
is by far the best candidate, probably better than we deserve.
It should be known that Jonathan Crutchley's donation to McCain left the
entire Board in disbelief.
I am disappointed that we have lost some customers, and I understand the
anger. It is too bad for the web site if we lose customers, but PLEASE
never refer to me as a Republican. I consider it an offense.
At the request of the Board, Jonathan has stepped down as Chairman.
Sincerely,
Larry Basile
Update story in BayWindows
For me this is a good news/bad news letter.
It's good news because it clears up the extreme cognitive dissonance of trying to associate Larry Basile with McLame and the Republicans.
It's bad news in that Jonathan Crutchley, although asked to step down as Chairman, is still profitting from the site and will probably continue to use those profits against the GLBT community. It's his right to support whomever he wishes. We as a community don't necessarily have to make it easier for him.
After such a "career limiting move" as Crutchley's response to the inquiries that started this, I think he got a light sentence only being asked to step down and not resign from the board. Mortals such as you or I would have been met by HR and shown the door. Yeah, he's a co-founder and majority shareholder, but after doing such damage to the corporate brand, it's amazing he's not completely ousted from the company.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 05:34 pm (UTC)I'm thinking of writing to Manhunt and explain to them that so long as Crutchley profits financially from Manhunt, I will not be sending any of my money to their company. You're quite right that Crutchley is free to make political donations to the candidates of his choice. But I certainly don't have to hand him the funds that he will subsequently use in donations that work against my interests as a gay man.
If Manhunt wants me to pony up for a paid membership, then they have to show that Crutchley has fully divested all of his monetary interests in the company.
The jury is still out for me on whether to take the further step of deleting my unpaid account.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 05:44 pm (UTC)I do think this is hilarious though. :)
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 05:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 05:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 05:51 pm (UTC)Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 05:51 pm (UTC)Sorry Furrbear for venting on your log.
< soapbox activated>
... and to those who claim that they have an unpaid account and it doesn't matter since this site is not making money from them... Sounds like bear411 all over again... "I'm only on there because it's free"... zzzzzzz tired of hearing excuses...
I don't believe that anyone can be so desperate as to actually think and believe that it is ok to stay on this site because they don't have a paying account and the site can't make money from their non paying account..... WRONG ...
Get some balls and hunt for your own man-hood on a site is supportive to our cause! Stop thinking with your head and think with your brain!
< /soapbox speech>
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 05:55 pm (UTC)Also, I've read that manhunt has a similar kind of image naming protocol that 400+10+1 has, and it would be easy to build a bookmarklet for it.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 06:07 pm (UTC)That leaves plenty of room for him to still remain a board member or other principal of the corporation. He's still making money off of guys trolling for cock, he's just not calling the business decisions.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 06:28 pm (UTC)I don't log onto the system very often. And because I'm not a paying member, there are so many constraints on what I'm able to do, I usually don't stay on there very long.
So I'm weighing a more measured response that I hope might incent Manhunt to further sever their ties with Crutchley while not unnecessarily punishing Larry Basile and others of like mind at Manhunt.
I just think it's counterproductive to burn the bridge entirely since there's not much more you can do after that. There's always that option later.
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 06:33 pm (UTC)This is not about finding one's balls. And it's as offensive to suggest that those of us who are taking a pause to think this through rather than indulge a knee-jerk reaction are as responsible for harm done as Crutchley. It's about using one's head and measuring one's reaction while there is still an opportunity to use leverage to further persuade Manhunt to sever all financial ties to Crutchley.
Going nuclear and punishing a lot of other people who don't agree with Crutchley's decision may be very gratifying in a feral breast-beating manner but it doesn't strike me as especially well considered or wise. If they won't break all ties with Crutchley, there is always the option to delete one's account as further action.
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 06:43 pm (UTC)Plus, you're all sexy when you get so fired up *wink*
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 06:49 pm (UTC)What have you to gain or lose by taking action now and let it be known that is it not enough to just ask him to step down? Like one of John's friends stated, he is still going to get proceeds from ads and other things on the site even from non paying members as long as he is part of the company.
And as for the other one who is crying "I am a good guy, look at all I have done" ... then him more than anyone else should really speak out instead of defending someone who donates to Republican.
In this case One bad apple does spoil the whole bunch!
I do want to apologize if I have offended you as it does seem that I attacked you since you are/were/is the first one to actually write what many on that site are thinking or anyone else for that matter, but I have to honestly say that I am not one who goes crazy over politics, but this one for some reason does burn, so it may appear to be a knee jerk reaction, but it is not, it is something that needs to be heard by all and action should be taken against a site that is slapping someone on the hand for wrong doing against all of us.
What type of message is this sending out to all if only some show no concern for something like this?
Again, my apologies to anyone offended for my sincerity, it seems to always get in the way of being liked. I so enjoy being me!
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 06:54 pm (UTC)I agree with you that while we should try to persuade them to cut Crutchley off totally (and really, their failure to do so is by all means, a reasonable cause to stop using Manhunt), in the mean time, he'll still be getting your money. It takes so little time to make a new account, we're better off (and would be a stronger force) canceling our accounts and offering to come back if they cut him off, than threatening to cancel if they don't.
As for people that still use bear411... I just feel kinda nauseated.
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 06:58 pm (UTC)As I read what Basile wrote, he's not defending Crutchley. In fact, he makes a point of being pretty surprised by it. I take the man at his word. And I do think he makes a fair point that Crutchley is far and away the exception and not the rule.
One does not cure cancer, it seems to me, by executing the patient...although that will bring the cancer to an end. As I was saying previously, my inclination is to write Manhunt and insist that my continuing to contribute to their enterprise...whether as a unpaid member or at potential paying member...depends on Crutchley divesting all financial interests in Manhunt. If they won't go that far, then certainly I would delete my account.
But if I just delete my account, I don't have too much leverage to get them to make the change I want to see. After all, what do we want here? Do we want Manhunt to continue without Crutchley connected and profiting from it or do we want Manhunt ruined financially?
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 07:04 pm (UTC)OK, so I must admit, I do look cute and sexy when I get fired up... HA!!
Again, I'm sorry if I said anything out of line on your post, but GAWD I so love to be me.. A bitchy jerk... and just say my view...
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 07:04 pm (UTC)None of them would give up B411 as their primary "chat service" (*cough*), because BearCiti didn't have a big enough "critical mass" to make their dick-hunts worthwhile. However, BearCiti never has reached that level of "critical mass" because no one would switch over to it. Mr. Cart, meet Mr. Horse. Mr. Horse, Mr. Cart. Gaaaaaaah!
Or maybe it's just a Suthun' thing that I, an inbred native Suthun'r, just doesn't see nor understand. *shrug*
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 07:06 pm (UTC)"I'm not on this site much it's poorly designed and badly run, message me on one of several other, better sites"
My profile is now deleted... not that I miss it
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 07:08 pm (UTC)Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 07:09 pm (UTC)I'm not for execution, but I'll readily support quarantine.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 07:11 pm (UTC)But prying this man away from making money from the company, as people have suggested, may not be possible. Even if he has no say in the day-to-day running of the company, they may not be able to simply force him to divest his stock in the corporation. It would take some fairly complex articles of incorporation to be able to do that and I really doubt that clause is in there. So, he may be involved with making money from his shares for a long time to come.
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 07:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 07:17 pm (UTC)Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 07:33 pm (UTC)Thanks for the chuckle.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 07:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 07:49 pm (UTC)Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 08:15 pm (UTC)Assuming that your description of the matter is accurate, which I'm in no position to determine one way or another, it seems to me then that what people who are outraged over this issue will only be satisfied with is the death of Manhunt.
If it's not acceptable to put pressure on Manhunt to get Crutchley to divest his interest in the company because he will make money and it's not acceptable to allow him to remain associated with the company because he will continue to make money, then it seems plan that the only outcome that will satisfy here is for the company to fold.
Which brings me back to my initial question. Do we really want to see Manhunt fold and the numbers of people who no doubt have politics compatible with ours put out of work or possible harmed financially because of a single political contribution by one person? I don't know about the ethics others use in situations like these, but I have a very hard time justifying harming 20 or 30 or how many of my "friends" there may be at Manhunt simply to spite one of my enemies.
At a certain point, what is being proposed stops looking like a quest for political justice and winds up looking eerily like mass burnings at the stake just to ferret out the one "witch" in Salem.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 08:16 pm (UTC)Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-15 08:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 09:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 09:00 pm (UTC)(I didn't even know that a gay chat/profile website has the NEED for a "chairman" - is this the guy holding the sling for the CEO during company meetings?)
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 09:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 11:04 pm (UTC)Has Crutchley forfeited his stock? I suspect not.
Does a percentage of every dollar spent with Manhunt still go eventually into the pockets of Mr. Crutchley? You bet your ass it does.
This is all rather moot for me, as I've never used Manhunt ... but if a similar thing happened with the owners of Squirt or Bearfront/Silverdaddies ... yeah, I'd close my account there.
The cognitive dissonance involved in giving profits of what is supposed to be a gay, pro-sex business and funnelling them into a political candidate who is expressly anti-gay, anti-sex, anti-peace and anti-choice makes my head feel as if it's going to explode.
[Gratuitous snarly comment about Log Cabin Republicans deleted before posting.]
no subject
Date: 2008-08-15 11:05 pm (UTC)Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-16 12:06 am (UTC)¡Ching! Voy a preguntar a todos mis cuates cómo decir "to vent/rant" en mexicano y tejano porque Uds. los boricuas son locos.
*abrazos amistOSOS de El Paso, TX y Cd. Juárez, Chih.*
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-16 01:20 am (UTC)Ni yo ... los hermanos aquí contestaron "desahogarse" en seguida, la única diferencia siendo el reflexivo.
Si no te molestas ¿qué dijo tu tía en PR?
no subject
Date: 2008-08-16 02:34 am (UTC)Your statement "it's amazing he's not completely ousted from the company" makes no sense at all. It is most likely legally impossible to remove him.
How do you propose that Manhunt, or any company, could possibly accomplish getting rid of a majority owner?
Based on published information about the structure of Manhunt it is unlikely they can even have a quorum of shareholders to even conduct a meeting without him. Being a private company and since he did nothing criminal or illegal, there is little they could do besides shut the company down - and the articles of incorporation almost surely put strict limits on how that can be done as well.
Yes, it's possible they could try to buy him out but he would have no obligation to sell at any price and the debt that the company would have to take on to do this could quite possibly cripple operations.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-16 02:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-16 03:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-16 05:00 am (UTC)We all have made mistakes about the people we associate with....and we learn to cut our losses and move on. If you do the right thing, people will know, and they'll support you. That's what Basile has to do...HAS to do...in order to salvage his own good name. There's nothing sacrosanct about Manhunt, and as several have pointed out here already, it really hasn't done much for a HUGE portion of the bear community. If you're a "boi" who has gotten some good "daddy-meat" out of it, it might be a different story, but the site doesn't appeal to the best nature of most of us. Let it die, if for no other reason than principle...make it clear that we will NOT tolerate being used to bankroll people who do not act in our collective best interests.
Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-16 03:05 pm (UTC)Re: Is not enough!
Date: 2008-08-16 03:10 pm (UTC)I was actually right the first time, I even spelled it right (which was what I thought I had done wrong), but you know how silly the Spanish (OH BTW, it's not Mexican, Tejano or Puertorican) language is ... I thought I spelled it wrong, but I even had that right. What do you know the PR was right ... AGAIN!!!
no subject
Date: 2008-08-16 05:31 pm (UTC)I'm voting for Obama for his views on other issues which affect us, not for his stance on LGBT ones. While he appears to be more tolerant than McCain, neither would ever make our issues an important concern during their presidency. We still have the same long, hard battle ahead for equality.