It could have been avoided.....

July, 2010. In the wee morning hours on Wednesday, Knapp had sent an email calling for an up and down vote on the usage of the terms "spiritual" or "psychological". I'd previously proposed using both, but Knapp adamantly stated, "No." Seeing as there were only three of us voting and two, Lema and Knapp, were clearly in disagreement, I was the tie breaker.

I voted in accordance with Knapp's term, "spiritual."

Knapp and I never had a disagreement. Knapp and Lema had a disagreement.

When Knapp called for this tie-breaking vote via email, Lema did not receive that email. I was not aware at the time that Lema did not receive that email and only discovered it days later and after Lema became upset - seeing that he was not informed a vote was being called for.

Was this intentional on Knapp's part, to not inform Lema that a vote was being called for? At one time I thought it was simply an error on Knapp's part in not clicking "reply all" on the email. Now, over a year later and due to the excessive lying I've discovered Knapp has engaged in, I'm not sure.

After my vote was cast, Lema began directing some of his objection toward me, questioning my motives. After me addressing these objections and insinuations with Lema and after I asked him where his apparent suspicion was coming from, Lema shared that he didn't understand why I had voted when I did. I responded that I had voted because Knapp had called for a vote. Lema asked, "When?" That's when we discovered, on Saturday night, that Lema never received the email Knapp sent on Wednesday calling for a vote. All these email exchanges were also shared with Knapp.

Sometime earlier on Saturday, the conflict between Knapp and Lema seemed to be calming. Knapp  had sent an email that, to me, sounded like the issue of the terms and of the conflict were open for discussion.

So I discussed, via email. Lema discussed, via email. Again, all these emails exchanges were also shared with Knapp. Knapp's only response was to send a lengthy ultimatum email asking for Lema's and my resignation within 24 hours if we couldn't agree to what Knapp stated that we all initially agreed to which Knapp stated was the democratic process. Within that ultimatum email were other insinuations that I had no idea I had engaged in.

I was totally baffled.

After Knapp sent the ultimatum email, I tried to reach him via phone twice, the last time leaving a message that I hoped we could talk and stating how confused I was by his ultimatum email. His response was to not return my phone call. Instead he sent me emails cutting off communication and letting me know just how untrustworthy, non-compassionate, and disrespectful I was.

He signed his final email,"Have a nice life."

****
****

In one of John Knapp's public writings, now accessible only via cache or via a certain ISP address, Knapp states that the three parties (Lema, myself, and John) disagreed over a main issue, that we were passionate about a cause, that tempers got heated, and that we couldn't move beyond the disagreement. He states that he closed down the project we working on because, according to Knapp, we simply couldn't work together and so...he went on to work with others.

That simply isn't the case.

Among other things, there wasn't a main issue that we simply couldn't move beyond. The only reason we couldn't get past it, is because John Knapp demanded an ultimatum and then cut off communication.

As far as a main issue, Knapp and Lema Nal had a disagreement over the words "spiritual" and "psychological." To me, the terminology wasn't that important, which I expressed  in my email exchanges with Knapp and Lema.  My only "passion" at the time, was to have a healthy place to help people exiting high-control groups; terminology was secondary.

The situation, in my opinion, could have been resolved simply, had communication stayed open and respectful.

But communication was terminated, not by Lema or myself, but by John who was unwilling to work to resolve any misunderstanding.

As far as tempers getting heated? Knapp's was the main temper. Lema got heated too. The only time I expressed anger (and that in a tiny dose, in no way "flared") was via email in response to John's ultimatum email. But mainly, I was confused and expressed that, multiple times.

****
****


Below is a rendition of the overview of the conflict that I submitted with my complaint to NY State. Emails are not included.
_____

THE ONLINE CONFLICT BETWEEN JOHN 

& THE OTHER ONLINE BOARD 

CO-ADMINSTRATOR

which took place
July 27 - August 1, 2010

(includes John's ulimatum email) 

[If needed, I can provide all emails for the following overview. Altogether there were 100+(?) email exchanges, within two different email threads. (I have attached {to this overview} two other email threads that are in addition to the 100+(?) emails that I have not included.) I realize this may be too much information; I just wasn't sure what to include and what not to include.]

The three parties involved were John Knapp, myself (Carol Welch), and Borz Lema Nal.

(NOTE: Lema is Chechen and, to my knowledge, has always lived and still resides in Russia. English is not his first language, but he used to work as a translator and his written English is quite fluent.)

This, of course, is my overveiw and is given to the best of my knowledge.

****

Tuesday Evening, 7/27/10: Lema and John began to express disagreement over the usage of the words "spiritual" or "psyhological" to describe the trauma that some people experience after involvement with high control groups. The phrase in which the words were to be used, would appear on the public online discussion board as part of a description for the board. Both Lema and John were passionate about their opinions.

[John owned/owns the online discussion board. Lema, myself, and John were Co-Administrators. The board address was http://www.knappfamilycounseling.com/phpBB3/index.php . The board was separate from (but would be a component of) John's non-profit organization that he was thinking of formulating.]

****

Wednesday, 7/28/2010: Beginning in the wee morning hours, the disagreement between John and Lema became heated. In one of the emails, in the wee morning hours, John called for an up and down vote regarding which word ("spiritual" or "psychological") to use in the phrase. I voted in agreement with John.

[NOTE: It was discovered around 9:45 PM on Saturday night (almost 4 days later), that Lema never received the email that John had sent Wednesday around 4:00 AM which called for the up and down vote. Thus Lema thought (up until Saturday night when we discovered the error) that John and I had gone behind Lema's back to make a decision.

It was later discovered that Lema never received a second email that John sent around that same time.

In typing up this overview, I just found another email that Lema never received, from that same time frame.
Apparently, with the 3 emails that Lema never received, John didn't click "reply all" when he sent them. An easy error for anyone to make. In my opinion, the emails Lema never received were an important factor that contributed to some of Lema's accusations and insinuations directed at John and myself in the conflict.]
*************************************

Wednesday (later), 7/28/2010: John contacts me via video Skype and discusses his exasperation with the circumstances regarding the conflict with Lema. I agree with him, that Lema is being adamant and hard to get along with. John stated that John felt that Lema was lecturing him. I made no comment to John's perception of this, though I didn't think Lema was "lecturing him." In hindsight, I should have stated my opinion.

John also stated that Lema was providing no evidence to back up Lema's opinion. I asked John if he had looked at the links Lema had provided in his argument for his opinion. John had not; so he then looked at (at least) one of the links and stated it was still just opinion, not evidence. My thought was, "Well isn't your viewpoint just opinion too?" Again I did not express this to John, and in hindsight I think I should have. I felt at the time John needed to simply vent so I mainly listened to what John had to say.

By the end of the Skype conversation, John seemed distressed and stated he needed to find someone to talk to (obviously other than me) about the situation. He mentioned [certain person] might be someone he could speak with.

****

Thursday, 7/29/2010: The three of us (John, Lema, and myself) meet on voice Skype for our weekly prescheduled conference call. As Creative Director, I was the one to oversee these calls. After 1/2 hour of business talk about the online board, Lema and John begin to discuss their disagreement, but John had to leave in 1/2 hour due to work so that conversation never got finished. (NOTE: Lema's spoken English is not as fluent as his written English, so spoken communication is a bit more difficult.)

****

Thursday (later), 7/29/2010: Lema started another email thread addressed mainly toward me with insinuations and accusations regarding my vote where I had voted for John's word proposal, questioning my reasons and motives behind my vote. I addressed these with Lema through Saturday evening.
(It was Saturday night during my back and forth emails with Lema, when we discovered Lema had never received the one email from John calling for the up and down vote.)

****

Friday, 7/30/2010: John called me on the telephone and stated that now Lema was referring to John or at least comparing him with a cult leader. (I had not been keeping up with all the emails, due to my work load and some family illness so had not read those emails yet.)

John also shared some other information in regard to a phone call he received that day or the day before, from a therapist in California. John felt the therapist was fishing John for information regarding dual relationships with clients and regarding the non-profit organization John was thinking of formulating. (I can share more of this if needed.)

John again stated he needed to talk to someone (obviously other than me) about all this. He also stated the verbal attacks from Lema had to stop within the next 24 hours. The dialog with Lema was (of course) wearing John down. I agreed that Lema was being accusatory toward both John and myself.

****

Saturday (morning), 7/31/2010: It wasn't until Saturday morning that I was able to catch up on John's and Lema's email exchanges. They had become quite heated, from both sides. At that point, I responded via email suggesting that maybe they should give it a rest. John had mentioned this previously, but still they had continued to go back and forth as Lema had continued to bring things up.

****

Saturday (afternoon), 7/31/2010: John sent an email which sounded to me like things were calming down between he and Lema and like John had brought how to word the phrase (the initial disagreement) back up for discussion.

[That email thread is attached and is labeled with a cover sheet, "Conflict: Back on the table for discussion, 7/31/2010." Please note the times on the responses, in light of not discvoering until Saturday night that Lema had never received John's email (from Wedsnesday) calling for an an up and down vote.]

****

Saturday (night), 7/31/2010: As stated previously, it is discovered that Lema never received John's Wednesday email calling for an up and down vote which (imo) was part of the reason for Lema's accusatory statements toward myself and John as Lema had thought John and I had gone behind his back to make a decision.

****

Sunday, 8/01/2010: John sent (what I refer to as) an ultimatum email, asking for a resignation decision within 24 hours from both Lema and I if, since according to John's perception, Lema and I could not agree with the democratic process (ie: voting).

I was totally confused by this email (especially in light of John's previous email in which it sounded that the discussion was back on the table) and was taken aback by some of the things John accused, inferred, and/or insinuated. I expressed my confusion and surprise in my response to the 'ultimatum' email.

[That email thread is attached and is labeled with a cover sheet, "Conflict: Ultimatum email, 8/01/2010." ]

________________________________