[quote=Watcher]Me thinks NASD Newbie reminds me of someone…[/quote]

Yes eerily familiar.  And yet here you are with only 4 posts, and suggesting NASD is someone you know from the past…hmmmmm…

So who are you then?

[quote=NASD Newbie][quote=Indyone]

No, I vote for paranoid.  I have a high profile couple who divorced, and client events caused no perceptible problem.  As Joe suggested, they were both apprised of the other's possible attendance, and no problems came up.  I lost zero accounts, and no one shamed me for including all my clients in a client appreciation event.  To this day, both are loyal clients and good referral sources.

You already sound a lot like Put Easy's alter ego.

[/quote]

This is not a discussion about what we wish would happen, or even about what normally happens.  It's about what could happen.

If we spend all of our time worrying about what might happen, we will spend the rest of our lives paralized.

It is rude, no RUDE, to invite divorced spouses to social events.  It makes them both uncomfortable.  To deny that is ridiculous.

Oh... baloney.  It isn't rude at all.  They are business clients.  Separate business clients I might add, and when clients are invited to a business function they do not have the right to dictate who can and cannot be invited.  So they are uncomfortable. Who cares if they are uncomfortable.  Life goes on and they need to get over it or move out of town.  What is rude is to expect everyone else to change their lives and businesses because these people have had some issues with each other.

Then add that there will be whispers among the others, and those whispers will be aimed at the host for being so out of touch with social graces as to invite the two.

We aren't talking about a close family function here, like a wedding or child's birthday.  I agree with you on this point.  We are talking about a group of strangers to each other who probably haven't clue one that Mr & Mrs Whosit have had a nasty falling out or even that they were ever married.  The only way that would come up is through the lack of decorum from either of the two parties.  If there are people who whisper and gossip then they have also lost their sense of the social graces.  They probably don't use a napkin, pick their teeth and sit with their knees apart to boot.

Manners, it's about manners.  People who don't have them will never understand how those who do have them will react.

Again, it is rude, and being rude never ends well.

Having been in Mrs. Whosits position, that of the ex wife being confonted in public instances, such as Chamber and Rotary Club meetings, Graduation ceremonies and ball games by the nasty presence of both the Ex Spouse and the floozie jezzabel, I know the correct and socially graceful way to handle the situation is to ignore the discomfort, make small talk if necessary, get the h#ll away from them and do not make everyone else uncomfortable or a part of some 5th rate melodrama.  People only talk if you make a scene.

[quote=babbling looney][quote=NASD Newbie][quote=Indyone]

No, I vote for paranoid.  I have a high profile couple who divorced, and client events caused no perceptible problem.  As Joe suggested, they were both apprised of the other's possible attendance, and no problems came up.  I lost zero accounts, and no one shamed me for including all my clients in a client appreciation event.  To this day, both are loyal clients and good referral sources.

You already sound a lot like Put Easy's alter ego.

[/quote]

This is not a discussion about what we wish would happen, or even about what normally happens.  It's about what could happen.

If we spend all of our time worrying about what might happen, we will spend the rest of our lives paralized.

It is rude, no RUDE, to invite divorced spouses to social events.  It makes them both uncomfortable.  To deny that is ridiculous.

Oh... baloney.  It isn't rude at all.  They are business clients.  Separate business clients I might add, and when clients are invited to a business function they do not have the right to dictate who can and cannot be invited.  So they are uncomfortable. Who cares if they are uncomfortable.  Life goes on and they need to get over it or move out of town.  What is rude is to expect everyone else to change their lives and businesses because these people have had some issues with each other.

Then add that there will be whispers among the others, and those whispers will be aimed at the host for being so out of touch with social graces as to invite the two.

We aren't talking about a close family function here, like a wedding or child's birthday.  I agree with you on this point.  We are talking about a group of strangers to each other who probably haven't clue one that Mr & Mrs Whosit have had a nasty falling out or even that they were ever married.  The only way that would come up is through the lack of decorum from either of the two parties.  If there are people who whisper and gossip then they have also lost their sense of the social graces.  They probably don't use a napkin, pick their teeth and sit with their knees apart to boot.

Manners, it's about manners.  People who don't have them will never understand how those who do have them will react.

Again, it is rude, and being rude never ends well.

Having been in Mrs. Whosits position, that of the ex wife being confonted in public instances, such as Chamber and Rotary Club meetings, Graduation ceremonies and ball games by the nasty presence of both the Ex Spouse and the floozie jezzabel, I know the correct and socially graceful way to handle the situation is to ignore the discomfort, make small talk if necessary, get the h#ll away from them and do not make everyone else uncomfortable or a part of some 5th rate melodrama.  People only talk if you make a scene.

[/quote] [/quote]

Nonsense.  People talk about each of us, behind our backs.

This is not a funeral or a wedding, nor is it the Rotary. It is a "by invitation" gathering and what I am saying is that there will be those who fault the host for inviting them both.

I say again, when given an choice it is rude to invite people into a situation where they will be uncomfortable.  Sneering "Get Over It" does not change the reality that the parties are uncomfortable.

If you were told by a finanical planner that he or she was going to be doing business with your ex would you be comfortable opening up to that planner?  Would your ex?

Do you think it's good social graces to create situations where people will feel uncomfortable?  It seems remarkably out of touch with manners, or a regard for the emotions of others, to do so.

My suggestion was from the very beginning that the event should be cancelled, or at the very least the two people in question should be asked to not attend after all.

The story itself caused somebody to say that the host should send an email to both of them explaining that they are both invited.  Email, yep there's a deeply personal way of communicating a sensitive topic.

Regardless, it is clear that the two don't know the other is coming.  I'll bet they don't even know that the host is still doing business with the other, and when they find that little detail out they'll be outta there in a heartbeat.

By cancelling the entire affair it can be rescheduled at a later date and everybody but those two can be invited.

Be selfish.  If you were the host do you think you'll be effective "networking" with your clients, or might you be preoccupied with those two, or three as it turns out.

We have no indication on the size of the town where this fiasco is scheduled to occur.  If it's a small town there is a good chance that everybody there will be aware of the situation.  To many the host will appear to be unaware of what is going on in town.  What is the upside of such an impression?

Even if it's a larger city, there is quite likely to be somebody there who will be surprised to see those two, er three, in the room.  That will get the tongues to wagging.  What is the upside of hosting a party where everybody is talking about what a social mistake you had made?

What the planner should have done is not invite either of them.  If the town is so small that they would have heard about it from somebody who was there you can bet that they would have been the topic of crazy conversations and the host would have been subject to withering second guessing.

By not inviting them the host will be thought of to have displayed far more class than would be displayed by not realizing that they will be uncomfortable.

"Joe, I'm having a client gathering again this summer.  I'm not going to invite you or Joan because I don't want to make the two of your uncomfortable.  Instead what Mary and I would like to do is take you and Bubbles to Ruth's Chris for dinner next Saturday."

"Joan, I'm having a client gathering again this summer.  I'm not going to invite you because I don't want you to feel uncomfortable in the same room with Joe and his slut.  Instead Mary and I would like to take you to Ruth's Chris for dinner next Sunday afternoon.  Please feel free to bring a friend if you'd like, we value our friendship and want to share some quality time with you."

[quote=NASD Newbie][quote=Indyone]No, I vote for paranoid.  I have a high profile couple who divorced, and client events caused no perceptible problem.  As Joe suggested, they were both apprised of the other’s possible attendance, and no problems came up.  I lost zero accounts, and no one shamed me for including all my clients in a client appreciation event.  To this day, both are loyal clients and good referral sources.

You already sound a lot like Put Easy's alter ego.[/quote]

This is not a discussion about what we wish would happen, or even about what normally happens.  It's about what could happen.

It is rude, no RUDE, to invite divorced spouses to social events.  It makes them both uncomfortable.  To deny that is ridiculous.

Then add that there will be whispers among the others, and those whispers will be aimed at the host for being so out of touch with social graces as to invite the two.

Manners, it's about manners.  People who don't have them will never understand how those who do have them will react.

Again, it is rude, and being rude never ends well.[/quote]

Well, again, I speak from experience and I can tell you that I had no problem whatsoever with the above situation.  I made both parties aware of the possibility that their ex would be at the event and let them choose whether or not to attend.  In this case, they both chose to attend and as far as I could tell, they all had a good time.  If anything, the couple in question appreciated me not making an issue of their recent marital difficulties.  I'm starting to wonder if you're even an advisor as you don't sound like you have much experience with client events.

Inviting both parties is far from rude.  What would be rude would be to not invite them, and to make a big issue of it by calling them and telling them that you weren't inviting them due to their recent marital difficulties.

Sorry...you and I will just have to disagree on this one.

Welcome back Put Trader/Rick/Big Easy!

You didn’t stay away long this time at all!!!

[quote=joedabrkr]Welcome back Put Trader/Rick/Big Easy!

You didn't stay away long this time at all!!![/quote]

Shhhhh! Joe!  You're gonna get him booted again!!!

[quote=Indyone]

[quote=joedabrkr]Welcome back Put Trader/Rick/Big Easy!

You didn't stay away long this time at all!!![/quote]

Shhhhh! Joe!  You're gonna get him booted again!!!

[/quote]

I've read about this Put Trader person.  In fact there is an entire thread devoted to him somewhere.

Surely somebody who generates such passion, on both sides, is a valuable asset to an internet discussion forum.

As I reviewed the postings it occurs to me that the monitor is the poster known as Starka.  I arrived at this conclusion based on the following logic:

On Tuesday the poster known as Big Easy Flood signed off with a promise to respond to a poster named Rugby.  Big Easy Flood then went to get his brother in law at the airport.

The next day Starka informs the group that Big Easy Flood's account had been closed.

Why would Starka know that?  Would it occur to you to check to see if any given poster's account had been closed because he or she had not responded overnight?  Especially after having signed off explaining that he would be out of pocket for the balance of that day and probably most of the next day.

Additionally, to the extent that there was a "food fight" as somebody referred to it, the instigator of the food fight was Starka.  Big Easy Flood was calmly responding to comments and questions left by others when Starka appeared and started sneering.

Why would RR Magazine "kill" Big Easy Flood but not kill Starka at the same time?  When there is a fight on the playground both kids have to stay after school.

Put/BEF, you're output is amazing! Here's an emoticon for old times sake!

[quote=NASD Newbie][quote=Indyone]

[quote=joedabrkr]Welcome back Put Trader/Rick/Big Easy!

You didn't stay away long this time at all!!![/quote]

Shhhhh! Joe!  You're gonna get him booted again!!!

[/quote]

I've read about this Put Trader person.  In fact there is an entire thread devoted to him somewhere.

Surely somebody who generates such passion, on both sides, is a valuable asset to an internet discussion forum.[/quote]

I agree, as long as the poster stays mostly on topic and refrains from excessivley derogatory and insulting posting.  Had "Put Easy"/NASD Newbie stayed on topic more and limited the insults, he wouldn't have to keep falling back on alter egos to satisfy his craving for posting on this forum.  I've pointed out examples of posts that I thought were very constructive and well worth reading.  The problem is, you have to wade through the 95% garbage to get to the 5% that is worthwhile reading, and frankly, it's obvious that the folks who run this forum have less patience than I do.

...and newsflash...it's not Starka that's running these boards...sorry to burst your conspiracy bubble... (emoticon in memory of Put Easy)

[quote=Indyone]

I agree, as long as the poster stays mostly on topic and refrains from excessivley derogatory and insulting posting.  Had "Put Easy"/NASD Newbie stayed on topic more and limited the insults, he wouldn't have to keep falling back on alter egos to satisfy his craving for posting on this forum.  I've pointed out examples of posts that I thought were very constructive and well worth reading.  The problem is, you have to wade through the 95% garbage to get to the 5% that is worthwhile reading, and frankly, it's obvious that the folks who run this forum have less patience than I do.

...and newsflash...it's not Starka that's running these boards...sorry to burst your conspiracy bubble... (emoticon in memory of Put Easy)

[/quote]

Let me see if I have this right.

There was a retired wirehouse upper middle manager sharing his points of view.

When his point of view differed from one of the kids with a few hours experience that kid would insult the experience, yet it is the retired manager who is to blame?

Is that it?

As for your Starka comment.  That would be because you're the monitor?

[quote=NASD Newbie][quote=Indyone]I agree, as long as the poster stays mostly on topic and refrains from excessivley derogatory and insulting posting.  Had “Put Easy”/NASD Newbie stayed on topic more and limited the insults, he wouldn’t have to keep falling back on alter egos to satisfy his craving for posting on this forum.  I’ve pointed out examples of posts that I thought were very constructive and well worth reading.  The problem is, you have to wade through the 95% garbage to get to the 5% that is worthwhile reading, and frankly, it’s obvious that the folks who run this forum have less patience than I do.

...and newsflash...it's not Starka that's running these boards...sorry to burst your conspiracy bubble... (emoticon in memory of Put Easy)[/quote]

Let me see if I have this right.

There was a retired wirehouse upper middle manager sharing his points of view.

When his point of view differed from one of the kids with a few hours experience that kid would insult the experience, yet it is the retired manager who is to blame?

Is that it?

As for your Starka comment.  That would be because you're the monitor?[/quote]

hmmmm...I think the preponderance of evidence would show that Put Easy often was the instigator of unpleasantness.  I won't say I've never picked a fight on here, but Put Easy seemed almost to enjoy it, considering how often you did it.

On Starka, no...once again...sorry to burst your Bubble.  I know who Starka is, and he knows who I am.  When I was looking to make the jump, Starka was a wealth of information and graciously took some time to speak to me on the phone one night for well over an hour.  Both of us are independents.  We don't necessarily run our businesses the same, but I don't believe either of us cares to run an online forum.  If I DID run this forum, rather than giving you the boot, at teh risk of being labled a censor, I'd delete your more insulting posts and try and leave as much good information as I could...hoping that you would learn to not cross the line while continuing to make meaningful posts.  Your experience and knowledge is valuable, but many people probably don't even read it because they assume (and rightly so 90% of the time) that it will be filled with insults and angry diatribes.

If you do a better job of staying on topic (which we aren't here), perhaps "newbie" will survive this time...

[quote=Indyone]

On Starka, no...once again...sorry to burst your Bubble.  I know who Starka is, and he knows who I am.  When I was looking to make the jump, Starka was a wealth of information and graciously took some time to speak to me on the phone one night for well over an hour.  Both of us are independents.  We don't necessarily run our businesses the same, but I don't believe either of us cares to run an online forum.

[/quote]

Let me see if I have this right. You have no way of knowing if Starka could be a monitor or not, but you choose to believe not.

Is that right?

[quote=Indyone]

If I DID run this forum, rather than giving you the boot, at teh risk of being labled a censor, I'd delete your more insulting posts and try and leave as much good information as I could...hoping that you would learn to not cross the line while continuing to make meaningful posts.  Your experience and knowledge is valuable, but many people probably don't even read it because they assume (and rightly so 90% of the time) that it will be filled with insults and angry diatribes.

If you do a better job of staying on topic (which we aren't here), perhaps "newbie" will survive this time...

[/quote]

What would be an example of an "insulting post?"  Would referring to a branch manager as a leech be insulting?

Would referring to a home office vice president as "Vice President of Paper Clips" be insulting?

Just what is insulting to your sensibilities?

[quote=NASD Newbie]

[quote=Indyone]

On Starka, no...once again...sorry to burst your Bubble.  I know who Starka is, and he knows who I am.  When I was looking to make the jump, Starka was a wealth of information and graciously took some time to speak to me on the phone one night for well over an hour.  Both of us are independents.  We don't necessarily run our businesses the same, but I don't believe either of us cares to run an online forum.

[/quote]

Let me see if I have this right. You have no way of knowing if Starka could be a monitor or not, but you choose to believe not.

Is that right?

You're right...I have no way of knowing for sure, but I've been on his website and have spoken to him and the evidence is fairly compelling that he is who he says he is.

[quote=Indyone]

If I DID run this forum, rather than giving you the boot, at teh risk of being labled a censor, I'd delete your more insulting posts and try and leave as much good information as I could...hoping that you would learn to not cross the line while continuing to make meaningful posts.  Your experience and knowledge is valuable, but many people probably don't even read it because they assume (and rightly so 90% of the time) that it will be filled with insults and angry diatribes.

If you do a better job of staying on topic (which we aren't here), perhaps "newbie" will survive this time...

[/quote]

What would be an example of an "insulting post?"  Would referring to a branch manager as a leech be insulting?  Yes, I'd have to agree with that one.

Would referring to a home office vice president as "Vice President of Paper Clips" be insulting?  Ditto...that's also fairly insulting.

Just what is insulting to your sensibilities?  A lot of things are insulting...I just choose to let most of it roll off my back.  When I don't I usually end up in long time-wasting back and forth posts that I often end up regretting but seem almost powerless to stop...kind of like this one...[/quote]

I really don't want to get into a "but he started it" or "he does it more than I do", but that is my sense of what's happened here in the past.  You might view it as favoritism, but you haven't exactly come off as Emily Post in the past, despite your apparent awareness of manners and what is considered rude, and I think that's what's caused problems.  The "Vice President of paperclips" and "leech" comments, while funny to some of us, are understandably insulting to you, but I believe that they were in response to similar posts that you'd initiated ealier and with greater frequency.  I could be wrong, but that's my perception, and I believe that it's the perception of the majority of participants here.  A little bit of this once in awhile is all in good fun...you just have to know when you're overdoing it...

...fair enough?

Indy,

Do you realize how vapid it is to declare that you've been on Starka's website and having done that you know he is not the monitor of this forum. Somebody is, and why would that somebody not go ahead and participate in the discussions as well?

For that matter how do you know that Starka is the guy profiled on the LPL website.  For all you know Starka could be that guy's junior associate.

This is the Internet, ugly is pretty, short is tall, poor is rich, up is down.  You have to pay attention to what is said and how it is said in order to know if a comment has currency or not.

…you win…I quit!

Dobe…sorry for the hijack.  Let us know how your client event goes…

[quote=Indyone]Dobe...sorry for the hijack.  Let us know how your client event goes...[/quote]

Let's turn it back to that discussion.

Indy, do you not have enough class to understand that people who went through an angry divorce within the last few months cannot help but be uncomfortable in each other's presence?

It's not a matter of if they should or not, it's the reality that they will.

The entire thesis is that a financial advisor paints himself/herself in a very unfavorable light for being so unaware of the emotions with which he or she is dealing.

The two people may do lip service to some form of, "Oh, that's alright.  I understand" but they don't and they will resent it.

Everybody who argued in favor of inviting them argued from the "If they're adults they can get over it......." point of view.

That is irrelevant.  This forum is to discuss the wisdom of the advisor inviting them at all.  Sure they can get over it, and sure they should be willing to be in the same room at the same time.

But the sin of intentionally exposing them to the emotional turmoil is what the advisor should be considered.

You have said that you had a divorced couple at such an event.  Two questions:

1.  Was the divorce particularly unpleasant and was it still so fresh that the final divorce decree may not have even been filed?

2.  Did it ever occur to you that you were being rude in inviting them, but that their class trumped your lack of it?

[quote=Indyone][quote=NASD Newbie][quote=Indyone]I agree, as long as the poster stays mostly on topic and refrains from excessivley derogatory and insulting posting.  Had “Put Easy”/NASD Newbie stayed on topic more and limited the insults, he wouldn’t have to keep falling back on alter egos to satisfy his craving for posting on this forum.  I’ve pointed out examples of posts that I thought were very constructive and well worth reading.  The problem is, you have to wade through the 95% garbage to get to the 5% that is worthwhile reading, and frankly, it’s obvious that the folks who run this forum have less patience than I do.

...and newsflash...it's not Starka that's running these boards...sorry to burst your conspiracy bubble... (emoticon in memory of Put Easy)[/quote]

Let me see if I have this right.

There was a retired wirehouse upper middle manager sharing his points of view.

When his point of view differed from one of the kids with a few hours experience that kid would insult the experience, yet it is the retired manager who is to blame?

Is that it?

As for your Starka comment.  That would be because you're the monitor?[/quote]

hmmmm...I think the preponderance of evidence would show that Put Easy often was the instigator of unpleasantness.  I won't say I've never picked a fight on here, but Put Easy seemed almost to enjoy it, considering how often you did it.

On Starka, no...once again...sorry to burst your Bubble.  I know who Starka is, and he knows who I am.  When I was looking to make the jump, Starka was a wealth of information and graciously took some time to speak to me on the phone one night for well over an hour.  Both of us are independents.  We don't necessarily run our businesses the same, but I don't believe either of us cares to run an online forum.  If I DID run this forum, rather than giving you the boot, at teh risk of being labled a censor, I'd delete your more insulting posts and try and leave as much good information as I could...hoping that you would learn to not cross the line while continuing to make meaningful posts.  Your experience and knowledge is valuable, but many people probably don't even read it because they assume (and rightly so 90% of the time) that it will be filled with insults and angry diatribes.

If you do a better job of staying on topic (which we aren't here), perhaps "newbie" will survive this time...

[/quote]

I can vouch for the fact that the fact that Starka and Indyone are gentlemen and scholars.  I have been considering them as my own financial advisor because of the idiot who runs mine now.  Oh that is me. . .darn. . .anywho it speaks volumes that you helped each other out.  May you land a HUGE account today.

[quote=Indyone]...you win...I quit![/quote]

Indy,

He did it again.  We all know BEF/Put was on here just to get our underwear/panties in a bunch.  And it looks like he has sucked us in again.   

NASD Newbie/BEF/Put,

If either one of the parties is as worried (as you think they will be) that the event will be uncomfortable, human nature dictates that that person will bow out of the invitation.