[ SHOWGSD-L ] Review-related
- From: Gail Sprock <gsprock@xxxxxxx>
- To: ShowGSD List <showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:34:13 -0700
Hi, all,
The Review's former typographer, Kerri Stalker, sent a post to the =20
GSDCA Board, but does not have the ability to post to the list. At =20
Kerri's request, I am sending that same post to the list.
----- Original Message -----
From: Kerri Stalker <mailto:kerrisis2@xxxxxxx>
To: board@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 8:13 PM
Subject: Susan Casey's proposal to the Board
Greetings to the Board of Directors of the German Shepherd Dog Club =20
of America,
My name is Kerri Stalker, and I proudly produced the German Shepherd =20=
Dog Review with Malice Keller and Gail Sprock from 1998 until March =20
2, 2006, when I was informed the February issue would be our last. =20
At that time, I was told only that Susan Casey had decided to use =20
her own production resources in the interim between official Editors.
When Gail read Susan Casey=92s proposal for the Editor=92s position to =20=
the Board, she was concerned enough with its contents to share it =20
with me. Susan Casey=92s proposal to the Board, and the impression she =20=
intentionally creates therein, disturbed me enough that I wrote the =20
following letter. As Susan specifically named me and Malice Keller =20
in her proposal to the Board, I felt it only right we be allowed to =20
address those specific items to the Board as well. I provided the =20
letter to Gail, trusting she would be able to share it and her own =20
concerns with the Board as a member of the committee. I now =20
understand she was not permitted to address the Board with her =20
concerns or mine.
I am very proud of my reputation as a production artist. As a free-=20
lance typographer and designer, I maintain a diverse and respected =20
clientele such as Canyon Ranch and Tucson Newspapers, Inc., and I =20
depend on maintaining that reputation for my livelihood.
That being the case, I feel sending the letter directly to your =20
attention the best way I may clear my very good name.
I sent the following to Gail to present to you:
Thank you so much for the opportunity to look at Susan Casey's =20
proposal. I must say, I was shocked and deeply disappointed by the =20
remarks contained in it about Malice Keller and myself.
I was never any less than honest, upfront and professional in all my =20=
communications with Susan. In fact, I feel I went above and beyond =20
even after the decision was made to pull the magazine from our =20
production team, helping her well into April fulfilling her requests =20=
for files, documents, images, etc.
I strongly dispute her claim that neither Malice and I "showed any =20
interest in speeding up the operation" or "exploring ways" that she =20
could help us. Getting the publication back on schedule was our top =20
priority and greatest concern, and we were all very excited with the =20=
possibility that working with Susan could help us obtain that goal. =20
We put in a lot of effort compiling information for Susan's benefit =20
when she visited Tucson in January - including a detailed list of =20
editorial tasks and a study of content, size, and production time =20
needed for each issue covering the past five years.
In going over my saved files of the various email communications =20
between Susan and myself during the very short period we worked =20
directly with her, my impression is that despite our giving her a =20
very specific and detailed list of areas where we really could have =20
used help in getting the issues back on track (i.e., keying in show =20
results and getting editorial content ready for layout earlier in =20
the production cycle), her interest was more focused on trying to do =20=
production tasks that we had well in hand. Yet when I attempted to =20
provide Susan with a template on January 16th so she could update =20
the Upcoming Events column for the next issue, she was unable to =20
utilize the file as she did not have the necessary graphic programs =20
or equipment, a fact she readily admits in her proposal.
I read with interest that she feels she had gained eight days with =20
the June issue. In reviewing the production calendar I developed for =20=
getting the magazine back on schedule, I believe our team would have =20=
been a full month ahead of where Susan is now if we had continued to =20=
produce the Review. I also noted she has not included any local show =20=
results in the issues she has produced. The typing of results, =20
scanning of winners pictures, and the proofing of the formatted =20
pages would have added at least a week of production time to each =20
issue.
As for her claim that =93even the previous staff didn=92t know=94 the =20=
difference between the kennels of Rivendell and Riverdell or how to =20
spell George Berstler=92s name, I would refer you to the =93Dog Name =20
List,=94 attached. This is list of past Grand Victors, ROMs, =20
Champions, titleholders, and kennel names that I compiled, updated, =20
and maintained during the years we produced the Review. We used this =20=
document for every issue to make sure that in every show result, =20
advertisement, pedigree, and article the spelling and list of titles =20=
and awards for each individual dog was correct and complete. And I =20
recall that Gail Sprock was always supremely knowledgeable about and =20=
greatly concerned with the spelling of the names of all the members, =20
Club officers, Judges, breeders and advertisers associated with the =20
GSDCA and contained in the pages of the Review.
Finally, due to my long association and great affection for the =20
Review, I provided Susan examples of editorial layouts for her use =20
(and she may have obtained others from the electronic files of =20
recent issues she had solicited from Sutherland) so that the Review =20
would have some consistency during the interim between official =20
Editors. I have seen several of the issues she has produced, and =20
recognized many of the editorial layouts as being designed by our =20
production team. However, due to the libelous and damaging remarks =20
made by Susan to the Board, I must insist that she cease and desist =20
immediately using any and all templates, layouts, designs, and =20
artwork developed by myself and Malice Keller in her production of =20
the Review. The past issues themselves are, of course, the property =20
of the GSDCA and may be used in part or in their entirely AS =20
ARCHIVES of the individual issues, but the layout and design, being =20
the intellectual property of our production team, must not be used =20
by Susan Casey now or in the future.
Regretfully,
Kerri L. Stalker
5052 E. Rosewood Street
Tucson, Arizona 85712
(520) 971-3399 (cell)
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2006. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - URL temporarily deleted due to AOL issues
============================================================================
Other related posts:
