This is an archive of past discussions about Tim Hartman. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between DATE and DATE.

Post replies to the Main Talk Page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to Talk:Tim Hartman/Archive02. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. Bob Hubbard 21:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

What was Mr. Hartmans last rank under the professor and how was he promoted to a higher rank after the Profs' death?

== Bob Hubbard 21:49, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Tested for 6th at July 2000 Michigan Summer camp by GM Presas. Reportedly the highest ranked test in US. Recieved Datu Title shortly thereafter
This was documented on modernarnis.com by Lisa McManus.
Source: Archives of ModernArnis.com
http://datuhartman.com/bio.html
martialtalk.com Promoted to 7th by WMAA Advisory Board Jan. 2003
Source: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5937

Promoted to 9th by WMAA Advisory Board June 2005 Source: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24780

All 3, but mostly the first have been discussed to death on MartialTalk. This may be a good place to start, though some of the links are broken. http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=157

==

Bob Hubbard 22:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC) Concerning recent vandalizations of this listing:
The Ip Addresses of 61.214.43.48 221.189.160.246 and 60.45.18.115 coinside with a banned MartialTalk.com member currently living in Japan, Robert Rousselot (Banned MartialTalk.com member RRouuselot, also going by RyuShiKan). He also posts on Bullshido as "PainMaker", E-Budo as "TrollBasher" and has been suspended from numerous martial arts webforums for trolling, disruption, obnoxious behavior and fraud busting.
The IP address 58.91.182.86 also comes from Japan.
Other IP addresses listed here that have been defacing this and the WMAA listing also coincide with users banned from MartialTalk.com, FMATalk.com or both sites.

==

Datu Puti I confess that I did add a link to the bullshido thread at one time. I believed that a counterpoint to what I saw as a blatant self-promotion was called for. And I did participate in a history revision campaign. Now that a dialog has opened up and some semblance of compromise has been met I will no longer participate in that admittedly shallow game. What others are doing I have no part of. However I do have a question regarding Mr. Hartmans "Im only a WMAA 9th dan" idea. Isnt Mr Hartman teaching "Remy Presas Modern Arnis"? Isnt his thing the whole "I am 100% Remy Presas Modern Arnis"? If he needed to be promoted to promote people within his organization doesnt he have to be Modern Arnis ranked to do so? Hes using this WMAA rank to grant Modern Arnis Rank but hes not a Modern Arnis 9th Dan? I dont get that logic. Thats a fine hair to split. Have any other Datus had their orgs. promote them? At least D. Anderson is saying that his rank is in a separate style.WMAA is a Modern Arnis Org. What else is his rank supposed to be in?

JJL 06:01, 21 December 2005 (UTC) Who could have promoted him to 9th dan from within Modern Arnis? I think this discussion is best taken to a web board, not Wikipedia, unless it centers on language to be used in this entry. I think the current language makes the distinction clear, and I am not aware of any significant controversy over the rank. Barring objections from Dr. Schea's group, MARPPIO, another Datu, etc., any concerns would appear to be local and minor.

Other "Major Players" from within modern arnis. Not a board from within your own org. made up of of friends and students. And before he starts acting the martyr being picked on by all these nasty people, perhaps he should re-read his own words that you have posted up here. There seems little problem with dishing out controversial topics.

Hubbard I see you are up to your old tricks of slinging mud and trying to discredit former members of your board/private universe that you either disliked or disagreed with. Funny, I found RRouselot’s and several other boardmembers posts to be very informative and entertaining. Especially the fraud busting! I think you must have feared that the most since your own training and teachers have more than suspicious claims. Naming people on here is probably not a good idea. Especially RRouselot, since his training knowledge and skill dwarfs anything you have done. You basically boot anyone off your little board that displeases you. Here, just as on your board it’s also evident that anyone that you don’t agree with is automatically labeled a troublemaker, a troll, or bad person of some sort. Basically you can’t face the fact that your teacher Hartman is known by some folks as being quite different than his press releases.

From Hubbard: He also posts on Bullshido as "PainMaker", E-Budo as "TrollBasher" and has been suspended from numerous martial arts webforums for trolling, disruption, obnoxious behavior and fraud busting.

Numerous forums?? I know he got kicked of your little kingdom but I checked the others you mention and his account seems to be active. Does numerous = 1?

Bob Hubbard 09:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showgroups.php? Under "Account Suspended" See "RRousselot" Account on e-Budo appears to be deleted, again. Neither site is in my "little kingdom" as you put it. In addition, his account on MartialTalk was suspended repeatedly for rule violations, closed, reopened, then banned after rabid fraud busting activities that involved Tim Hartman and attempts to disrupt an event Hartman was involved in, as well as repeatedly showing a complete lack of respect for rules or staff. A search on Budoseek or MartialTalk for threads that involved said user will validate those points easily. It would be interesting to know if your ip matches any of those used by the vandals here or in the Modern Arnis entry.

I have no problem with anyone posting anything credible. The thread that a group of troublemakers continually has been trying to insert into this listing, both directly and covertly, is little more than unsubstantiated opinions by anonymous net-trolls, sour grapes, and character defamation bordering on the libelous on a site that requires no proof, no evidence and no accountability. I am not on this site to engage in word wars with net-warriors. I simply looked at the most active vandal, compared to my sites logs, and kept coming up with the same rabid fraud buster. If that somehow offends you, then I am sorry. The fact that prominant Filipino martial artists such as Datu Bong Jornalas, Rick Manglinong, Punong - Guro Myrlino Hufana, Grandmaster Anding De Leon, Master Huk Planas, and more have no problem with Tim says more to me, and others, than what a few others might think.

Bob Hubbard 09:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
1) http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showgroups.php? Under "Account Suspended" See "RRousselot" 2) Account on e-Budo appears to be deleted, again. 3) Neither site is in my "little kingdom" as you put it. 4) In addition, his account on MartialTalk was suspended repeatedly for rule violations, closed, reopened, then banned after rabid fraud busting activities that involved Tim Hartman and attempts to disrupt an event Hartman was involved in, as well as repeatedly showing a complete lack of respect for rules or staff. 5) A search on Budoseek or MartialTalk for threads that involved said user will validate those points easily. It would be interesting to know if your ip matches any of those used by the vandals here or in the Modern Arnis entry.

6) I have no problem with anyone posting anything credible. The thread that a group of troublemakers continually has been trying to insert into this listing, both directly and covertly, is little more than unsubstantiated opinions by anonymous net-trolls, sour grapes, and character defamation bordering on the libelous 7) on a site that requires no proof, no evidence and no accountability. 8) I am not on this site to engage in word wars with net-warriors. I simply looked at the most active vandal, compared to my sites logs, and kept coming up with the same rabid fraud buster. If that somehow offends you, then I am sorry. The fact that prominant Filipino martial artists such as Datu Bong Jornalas, Rick Manglinong, Punong - Guro Myrlino Hufana, Grandmaster Anding De Leon, Master Huk Planas, and more have no problem with Tim says more to me, and others, than what a few others might think.

Reply from RRousselot:
1) Yup, for budoseek it sure does. Why? Because I disagreed with some of the internet warriors BS on that site and stated as much. However, I hold no ill will towards the Webmaster Robert Carver. He is a respected martial artist and a nice guy. You on the other hand have yet to earn your stripes in both areas.
2) Nope, do your homework Bob. The account is still open and active on E-Budo. You looked under the wrong name. E-Budo was down for a long period of time due what I heard was some hacker and to the webmaster being in Iraq. When it came back up I couldn’t log into my account for some reason and therefore made a new one.
3) That’s right, and the only site I have ever gotten banned from was yours. Speaking of which lets set it straight why I got the boot. Because I posted a link to the infamous Dr Gyi that Hartman is associated with. Dr Gyi has lied extensively about his military background and combat. A real class act. Not only did you ban me but also Matt Stone who made a sarcastic remark about it.
4) Yup. I find it funny how some of my violations got me suspended but when several other members, including your staff, to whom you are connected were found to be posting under duel accounts (a violation) you did nothing. Also of interest is an account when you sent me an email giving me “your word” that you would ban a certain member if they were found to have duel accounts…..they did, you knew about it and did nothing. That’s what’s called a hypocrite.
5) A search on several other forums give more than a few references that validate your actions as well as your Mods and Hartman. On Bullshido , do a search for Tim Hartman. I read some of them and although I only know 1 of the posters on those threads the antics others report about you and Hartman more than coincide with situations I have had to deal with you on therefore lead me to think that much of what they say has weight. Some of the others obviously know Hartman and have dealt with him in the past. Funny you should mention and trash talk Bullshido. On that site at least it is “put up or shut up”, however on Martialtalk it seems to be just the opposite “shut up because we don’t have to/can't put up”.
6) Obviously you do have a problem with it since you, or your Mods, slice and dice any thread that they don’t like or disagree with.
7) That’s pretty funny since your own site doesn’t even require people to sign their own names let alone back up what they claim. Martialtalk is not a martial researcher’s gold mine by any stretch of the word. I would like to see the stats on how many bogus “Soke” have posted on your forum compared to others. Some how I think yours would have more than most. Your martialtalk is a haven for wannabees. Even some of your current respected members have stated such not only about martialtalk but about you as well. More than a few serious, respectable martial artists left Martialtalk in disgust because they couldn’t stand you or the way Martialtalk was run, or both. Don’t try to place you and Martialtalk above reproach or insinuate you are better than some other board.

Anyway, Bob don’t think that for a second I have sour grapes about being booted from your little website. If you were to offer me a spot back on it I would decline. You could even throw in an all expense paid trip to Europe and I would still decline. You had a fairly good thing going for a while then screwed it up by letting the present Mod staff go crazy with what they obviously perceive as “power”. Which is funny since I know that several of your Mod staff have been exposed on places like Can Am for being far less than what they claim. And if you think I am an “internet warrior” you can always ask Mr. Lehman that was in one of the Units I conducted a class for on Camp Zama. I know he knows you. Oddly enough he also left Martialtalk in disgust as several others did. well this has wasted enough band with so if you would care to discuss this any further feel free to shoot me an email, you have my address.

=

Simple questions:

Did Tim Hartman recieve a 'promotion' from a board of directors that were junior in rank to him?

If Tim was promoted did that mean that they could be promoted to higher ranks as well?

Is the fact that junior practitioners (that have Tim's signature on their promotions) that are on a board of directors for an organization that Tim is Director reason for scrutiny?

Does this smack of conflict of interest?

Since Tim's organization is a "Modern Arnis" focused group, isn't his '9th' in Modern Arnis then?

If it was a 'leadership promotion' and not based on skill, why was skill mentioned in the Martial Talk announcement?

If it was skill based, why was the advantageousness of creating room for Tim to promote within his organizaiton (especially those that were topped out AND on the board of directors) mentioned?

Don't even try to deflect this kind of discussion. I read through some other public figures that have Wiki submissions. The discussions are pretty heated and contraversial there, so someone like Tim isn't so important that information on his Wiki entry can't be put under the microscope.

Don't start screaming 'defamation' or 'libelous' humbug, no one is making things up that would ruin Tim's reputation. The topic of discussion is Tim's promotion which is a real and factual event that the board and Tim made happen. There are some questions about its credibility/validity given the nature of the process.

I dont think people know what "libel" legally means. I also think that if someone desires to be a public name they should be able to bear the heat.

==
Robert, like I said, sour grapes. I hope you someday find the peace that has so far eluded your soul.
Paul, Fair questions, and most are ones I can't answer in detail since I wasn't involved in the promotion. I have seen a few notable kenpoists promoted by lower ranked boards, and as to the WMAA BOD, if not members of the organization, who should be on the board? There are at least 2-3 WMAA Board members monitoring this, so they can answer that if they want. You may disagree with the method on how Hartman went from 6th to 7th to 9th, but, if leading Filipino artists don't have an issue with it (and I'm referring to those names I mentioned previously), why is it a big deal for a small number of people in WNY? According to the Filipinos I have spoken to (see list), they don't and they have indicated that Tim should have assumed the Grandmaster title and the system upon Remys death as he was the highest tested active US black belt. From what I've seen, Tim's been pretty upfront with things. The various press releases concerning promotions/splits/etc are archived on his site, and on MartialTalk, which contrary to one individuals rantings, rarely does remove threads, unless they violate rules or put the site at legal risk. I believe all of the threads concerning the IMAF split, formation of the WMAA, etc are still there for reference.

Did Tim Hartman recieve a 'promotion' from a board of directors that were junior in rank to him?

I believe they did hold lower numeric rank.

If Tim was promoted did that mean that they could be promoted to higher ranks as well?

My understanding is that you can only promote to 1 level below yourself. This would indicate that yes, they could now advance farther.

Is the fact that junior practitioners (that have Tim's signature on their promotions) that are on a board of directors for an organization that Tim is Director reason for scrutiny?

Not in my opinion.

Does this smack of conflict of interest?

Again, not in my opinion.

Since Tim's organization is a "Modern Arnis" focused group, isn't his '9th' in Modern Arnis then?

Yes, it would be, however it is up to the other organizations if they will recognize him as a 6th (which he publically tested for under Remy.) or as a 9th.

If it was a 'leadership promotion' and not based on skill, why was skill mentioned in the Martial Talk announcement?

Good question.

If it was skill based, why was the advantageousness of creating room for Tim to promote within his organizaiton (especially those that were topped out AND on the board of directors) mentioned?

Good question (assuming I understand the logic in there).

Now, let me ask one or 2 in return. - Who in the US could have promoted him? He held a 6th. Jeff Delaney and Randi Schea were 5ths at the time of Remy's death. Again, his juniors. The other Datus were either lower ranked, or equal rank. If he reached outside the Modern Arnis community to seek promotion, where should he have looked to find people qualified to judge him on ability who would know what GM Presas had been doing the last few years of his life? Obviously having a Karate instructor or a TKD master sign off on it wuold have created a completely different argument, that being the debate over their ability to judge FMA. I do believe we have had this discussion repeatedly on MT though, as it's been a pressing point everytime a GM dies, on how things will go on.

Ren, See http://www.answers.com/libel&r=67
Bob Hubbard 08:04, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
==

From Bob Hubbard: Robert, 1) like I said, sour grapes. 2) I hope you someday find the peace that has so far eluded your soul.

Me: I see you chose not to email me but make this public….fine.
1) Sorry to disappoint you but you are wrong on the sour grapes thing. I, as well as other people you and I both know, have pretty much had it with places like martialtalk and many of the internet warriors, Soke-Dokes, liars, fakes, & wannabees there in. It’s not worth the time or effort to chase them all down and educate people as to what they really are. If you truly believe I have sour grapes then offer to renew my membership and see if I come back. If I do then you are right….I will honestly say I was on friendly terms with you in the past and helped you with some Japanese “stuff” in the past, however, your behavior and tactics on your forum dealing with various issues and people have lead me to believe you are not to be trusted. An example would be when you asked me via email to hold off posting anything about a member claiming to be a Soke because he was a potential client. You knew him to be “bad budo” and yet you asked me not to expose his Soke-dokeship so you could make a few bucks off of him. Isn’t that called “selling out” your integrity? Ironically other members of Martialtalk recognized him for what he was and exposed him. He was eventually booted off Martialtalk and as far as I know has the lowest negative “rep points” of any member to date.
Contrarily I had some of the highest positive “rep points” on Martialtalk at the time I was booted. Kinda strange so many members on Martialtalk would give me positive rep points if I was such a loathsome & despicable fellow as you seem to want to portray me here.
2) As for this comment….well this is often the common reply to those people that can’t refute what has been presented about them so they attempt to take some imaginary moral high ground and portray the other person as having some sort of inner demons or anger. Whatever Bob...you don't know me well enough to know what I think or feel.

Nothing I have read so far regarding valid questions about promotions or martial ability seem to meet the bar for libel. It seems that that threat is the last option to quiet any criticism.

==
Robert - The topic here is Tim, not me. You have "discussed" me enough in your juvenile tirades elsewhere. Dragging personal issues in here is against Wiki's TOS, though I know how well you follow site rules. Small points- a)You aren't welcome on MartialTalk b) Rep points, you know, so did Bester, seems his were pretty high too. A few folks were. c)Anyone who wishes to know where I stand on things can goto martialtalk and read anything I've written. It's all simple. So, more mud, or back to the topic? This isn't your little nest of mudslingers here.

Ren - The comments posted recently here, no. The comments posted elsewhere, yes. If not libel then "character defamation" and "idle speculation" along with "unsubstantiable" would apply. 5 people (and a few sock puppets)(4 who are associated with 1 instructor) saying someone's a problem, doesn't make it true. Can they name dates/places/times/people and back it up with paper/writen/audio/video evidence of wrongdoing? Then, there is also the question of why this attention to Tim, while there are other Arnis players who assumed high rank, promoted their friends, everyone jumping large numbers of ranks, including the initial, who basically signed his own promotion. Why not the scrutiny of them also? Would Tim get the same attention if he has changed the name and gotten a few people to sign off on a "founder" award? Wouldn't he then get the "You changed the name but its the same" hammering a few others have recently?

Could you gentlemen please sign your replies? It would make following them easier. Thank you.--Bob Hubbard 16:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Renegade68 Well..I waded through the thread in question and while somewhat juvenile, I still dont see anything slanderous. Mean spirited maybe but nothing worse than some of the things said by some of the other involved parties in some of the links you posted up here. And its not even close to as bad as bullishido can get at times. IMO the only thing of interest here is the possibly contraversial topic of the 9th dan promotion. If its now a "modern arnis" 9th than the page should reflect it.

This page lists that he tested for 6th under Remy, and was promoted to 9th by the WMAA. Or are you saying it should state 9th modern arnis? --Bob Hubbard 20:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Datu PutiHow can you be 9th in an "organization" but not in the art that organization teaches? It doesnt make much clear sense. If the rank grants privilege to give rank in a specific art how can that rank not "be" in that art? Organizational rank vs. art rank. It needs a better explination. Is Mr. Hartman a 6th or a 9th?

The way I read the announcement of the 9th degree is that it is a Modern Arnis rank, issued and recognized by the WMAA.--Bob Hubbard 20:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Datu PutiSo whats with the "leadership position in the WMAA only" qualifier? Is he a 9th in modern arnis or is he not?

The way I read it, the phrasing is so as to not suggest an insult to the other organizations or the other 5 Modern Arnis Datus. "The Board wishes to emphasize the fact that Datu Hartman's Lakan Siyam rank refers to his rank within the WMAA." and "His rank from Prof. Presas is Lakan Anim, 6th degree black belt." imply to me that they don't wish this promotion to suggest an insult to GM Presas's memory or seem to be an "threat" to other Modern Arnis orgs sovereignty. The lines "Board also wishes to reiterate that it is the position of the WMAA that all Modern Arnis Datus are equal in status. This numerical rank is within this organization, internal to the WMAA, and does not imply that Datu Hartman is ranked either above or below any other Datu with higher or lower numerical rank." would indicate that no insult or slight is intended to the 5 other leaders as appointed by GM Presas prior to his illness and passing. The lack of outcry from the other Datus would indicate they have no problem with this promotion. Again though, my opinions as I'm not on the WMAA Board. --Bob Hubbard 21:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

RRousselotBob Hubbard:
Robert - The topic here is Tim, not me. You have "discussed" me enough in your juvenile tirades elsewhere. Dragging personal issues in here is against Wiki's TOS, though I know how well you follow site rules.

Me:
As usual I see you try to hide behind a rule that you yourself have disregarded. Quid pro quo Bob, Quid pro quo……you bring my name up, single me out and sling mud at me you can expect the same in return.

I only brought your name up, as I was identifying one of the individuals behind the repeated childish vandalizations of this entry. If you hadn't been involved, you wouldn't have been identified. No mud, fact. Everyone else has moved on from that point. Now, do you have any factual information to bring to this discussion? --Bob Hubbard 22:53, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Me:
Bob, everything I posted about you is FACT. However, the mud that you have slung about me is incorrect

From Bob Hubbard: 1) He also posts on Bullshido as "PainMaker", E-Budo as "TrollBasher" 2) and has been suspended from numerous martial arts webforums for trolling, disruption, obnoxious behavior and fraud busting.

1) That information is wrong.
2) Numerous? Really? I count 1. Was it trolling, disruption, obnoxious behavior and fraud busting? No. It was for an entirely unrelated matter.
You can’t even get your facts straight.

So, if you're not "PainMaker" on BS, who are you? You already said you had used TrollBasher on E-Budo in the past. I see you haven't denied being one of those doing the childish game playing here. That, as well as the IP evidence matched with several forums logs backs me, not you. Now, you feel free to continue your normal activities and have a merry christmas. As I said, I'm not the subject here, and your continued personal mud slinging is against this sites TOS. This isn't USENET or Bullshido. --Bob Hubbard 23:28, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

From Bob Hubbard:
1) :So, if you're not "PainMaker" on BS, who are you?
2) You already said you had used TrollBasher on E-Budo in the past.
3) As I said, I'm not the subject here, and your continued personal mud slinging is against this sites TOS. This isn't USENET or Bullshido. --Bob Hubbard 23:28, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Me:
You opened this can of worms now deal with it.
1) Am I even a member of bullshido or just someone who reads it from time to time?

Their logs say you are a member.--Bob Hubbard 00:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

2) That was a long time ago before one of several crashes on E-Budo due to hacking and other problems that have happened with the site. As I said before, when tE-Budo re-opened there was some trouble logging in as my old screen name so I was allowed to create a new one…..And your point is????

You said I was wrong. You however contradict yourself

3) Oh but you have become one of the topics here by proxy. By giving factual account of past dealings with you and how you have acted in the past will lend or detract from your credibility to inform others here about various topics. Speaking of “the subject” here…where is your bud Hartman and why is it he doesn’t answer questions about himself directly instead of having someone else do it?

I'm answering because I feel like it. Again, you blur the issue. This is not a 'chat' board, and discussion should be on the subject at hand...which is not me. I have no wiki page, nor am I here doing anything but research and expanding the FMA section a little bit. Anyone who wishes can read my and your posts on martialtalk, budoseek, ebudo, bullshido, etc and make up their own minds on credibility and stability matters. If Tim or any of the WMAA BOD feels that these questions are worth their time, they're always free to reply. Their silence combined with the lack of outcry amongst Tims peers or the FMA masters on any of the reputable forums might indicate that those who count see no problem, while only a few local individuals, and a few trouble makers do. Again, Paul asked questions, I offered my responses, and other than 'renegade' and 'datuputi', I don't believe anyone else has. Maybe it's settled. I dunno, don't care.--Bob Hubbard 00:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

From Bob Hubbard:

1) You said I was wrong. You however contradict yourself

Me:

1) Not contradicting myself at all. You said: “He also posts on ….. E-Budo as "TrollBasher"” No, I don’t post as TrollBasher and haven’t for sometime. The account has been deactivated by me, however you obviously would like people to think it was shutdown by E-Budo staff.
I am still wondering where you get “numerous” from.
You whine about “libel” and “defamation of character” and yet you post false statements like the one below about me.
Hubbard writes:“He also posts on Bullshido as "PainMaker", E-Budo as "TrollBasher" and has been suspended from numerous martial arts webforums for trolling, disruption, obnoxious behavior and fraud busting.”

The last time I paid any attention to you on E-budo, you were using that handle. I went, looked, and see it's deactivated and you're using your name. I do recall you leaving that board at least once in a huff some time back. You were suspended from MT for your behavior and disrespectful attitude, closed your account, came back, and resumed fraud busting. You were banned from that site as a result. You were suspended from Budoseek some time ago and are still suspended. I based my comment on your more recent posts there. The CanAm board no longer exists. "Numerous" may have been too broad. "More than 1" would however be true. Again though, each pass through and you have less and less to refute. Now Robert, What are your issues with Tim Hartman, and why have you come here and disrupted this talk and vandalized this entry?--Bob Hubbard 01:23, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Hubbard,
First off you bring up my name and then you make comments about me; which aren’t are not even close to being accurate and then get in a huff when I refute them and give accurate and factual accounts about you and some of your antics. Only then do you want to change the subject back to Hartman. How convenient. Basically you have had an axe to grind with me every since you broke your own forum rules and started a “poll thread” on me when I questioned one of your moderators about his obviously bogus martial arts qualifications. Starting a poll on someone is an action that would have gotten anyone else on Martialtalk banned or at the very least suspended.

I identified you. If you weren't here causing trouble, there wouldn't have been a need to mention your name.--Bob Hubbard 01:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Well you did, and this is what you get for your efforts.

What? You showing the Wikiverse why we banned you? So, you've now basically admited to being here simply to stir up trouble and harass me. Cool. Now we know you're not here to do anything but disrupt things.--Bob Hubbard 02:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

You not only mentioned me but made false statements about me as well. Isn’t THAT what they call “libel”

I identified a vandal. If you weren't here causing problems, you wouldn't have been brought up. As to my statements, I stand by them. I'm speaking the truth, so therefore there is no libel. If you believe it is, we can have the lawyers finish the battle, supena the site logs and put it all out there. Robert, you can continue this on your own. I think you've finished my argument for me. Now if you'll excuse me, I have holiday stuff to finish. Merry Christmas. --Bob Hubbard 02:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Hubbard,
You were invited to discuss this via email but you chose not to.

The offer still stands. And with that, I'm done.

Concerning the quality of the WMAA promotion of Tim Hartman:

70.104.48.153The board members are all confirmed members of WMAA (junior to Tim Hartman) and therefore require Tim Hartman's endorsement within the organization on promotions and testing. They are also admitted 'close friends' of Tim Hartman. Here is a direct quote from the GE website on conflict of interest and ethics

THINGS TO AVOID:

    Preferential hiring of, direct supervision of, or making a promotion decision about a spouse, relative or close personal friend

This is considered 'conflict of interest' for most businesses.

Also consider that a board of JUNIORS acted as scorers/evaluators on a SENIOR artists skill and ability when they 'promoted' Tim to 9th degree. Since when is it ever valid to have 'Freshman' students act as scorers/evaluators of Senior Exit exams? Since when do Lieutenants in the military sit on a promotion committee for a General? There are many other brother Modern Arnis organizations and FMA grand Master commitees that are boarded with respected Grand Masters (peers and colleagues to the Late Remy Presas even) that have endorsed Modern Arnis 'well known' artists in the past. I am SURE that Bobby Taboada, Roland Dantes, Shishir Inocalla or others would have been honored to have reviewed Tim's skill, instructional abilities, and contributions to Modern Arnis and endorsed a promotion if they found him credibly skilled. Bobby Taboada for one has been endorsed by a Sokeship council as 'Head of System' himself, so he would probably be in a position to recommend Tim to that body as well if necessary. So, who could have Tim gone to? Well he could have reached out to many members of Remy Presas' circle of respected peers in and out of Filipino Martial arts. Next excuse please.

The credibility of these "Soke" boards is in question, as seen here Soke_(martial_arts). There is also the question on how credible a group is, when members are inducted against their will, or without their knowledge. We are discussing a promotion in Modern Arnis, and while a very excellent FMAer, Master Taboada is not a MA player. Datu Inocalla also, while an excellent arnisador, again is at best, the same numerical rank as Tim, as issued by GM Presas prior to his death. Roland Dantes endorsement might have been an appropriate one, given both he is a Modern Arnis player, and holds an 8th which I believe was from GM Presas. While there is some question on the 9th degree, Tims 7th was endorsed by several credible non-student masters. Again, peer promotions have been done, most notably in EPAK. Who promoted Huk Planas, Frank Trejo, and Larry Tatum to their ranks? --Bob Hubbard 18:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

These types of internal promotion practices smack of conflict of interest for two very clear reasons. First, The decision makers are in a position to gain personally from their decisions. Admitted by them directly, part of the rationale for promotion was to raise the glass ceiling. Tim goes from 6/7 to 9 and all those on the board of directors that feel trapped at 4/5/6 now gain because they can be promoted up to 8th degree. Is there a clear criteria of skill/instructor standards for such promotions?

Considering it is the opinion of those Fillipino masters that I have spoken to that Tim should have gone straight to 10th at Remys death, it seems to be less a "glass ceiling raise" than a respectful graduation of propmotion, rather than a "power grab", as at least 1 other Modern Arnis Grandmaster is commonly accused of. As to the 'clear criteria', I believe so, at least as much as any organization has for ranks above 5th. Do the IMAF's, the AMAA, or any other arnis organization have clear criteria for each rank 1st-9th?--Bob Hubbard 18:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Secondly, These board members have expressed publicly that they are close friends of Tim Hartman as well. This creates a bias that is considered conflict of interest in most legitimately run businesses. The GE entry is only one example.

Concerning the repeated mention of LIBEL:

Can libel suits be brought by a public figure? These suits are a bit dicer for the public figure.

A public figure may be an elected or appointed (a politician) or someone who has stepped into a public controversy (e.g., movie stars and TV stars, star athletes). Public figures have a "harder road to toll" than the average person since they must prove that the party defaming them knew the statements were false, made them with actual malice, or was negligent in saying or writing them. Proving these elements makes the chance of a successful lawsuit slim.

Tim has made himself a minor public figure. This is the burden of being well known. Bob Hubbard, by association, business, and incorporated identity have made himself a public figure of minor repoire.

If there was enough for libel or defamation cases, I am sure that it would have been pursued by now. Heck they are willing to call peoples employers over this stuff.

There is also the matter of a matter being worth pursuit. The "win" can cost more to pursue than any losses taken from letting the matter be. --Bob Hubbard 18:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Well. Like its been already said. The whole "libel" thing is probably misunderstood. Because someone says something you dont agree with or even insults you (weight, skill etc) isnt necessarily libel. If some sort of illegal activity was being implied or false statements that could harm reputation (ex. "This person was in prison for X. I wouldnt do busniess with him" when the person was never in prison)were being made, thats entirely different. Saying that a person is an unskilled hack is a personal opinion. Saying that a person committed a crime is an allegation of fact. Anyway. In this environment in particular I think its wrong to throw the accusation around if the goal is to stick to verifiable facts. Trying to keep facts out by intimidating people presenting contrary information is counterproductive. If libel were that easy to level on someone there could never be any investigative reporting, literary criticism, public opinion or freedom of speech. Not that anybody here is doing this but I keep seeing the word thrown around as some sort of warning or threat. Renegade68

Well, well, well I go away for a few days and look what happens. A whole hornet’s nest starts brewing. Nice to see everyone getting along. Where should I begin begin? How about with this.and Bob Hubbards comments. RRouselot is not “PAINMAKER”, so sorry to disappoint you Bob. The word “libel” gets thrown around on the internet more than basketball at a Lakers game.
To make libel cases stick you must show that there has been damage done as a result of the that particular issue. Very few libel cases are won, also, if by the odd chance you do win you still have to collect which is even harder. If chose to sue someone for libel and you lose, there is always the VERY good chance you will be counter sued and those cases have a better chance of being won since damages such as monetary etc can proven. So Mr. Hubbard you might want to watch how you use that word and who you threaten with it. Those kind of things tend to come back at you.

Who did -I- threaten with it in this discussion? No one that I can see.--Bob Hubbard 02:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Tim Hartman’s promotions:
I find it kind of strange that a Filipino art uses Japanese ranks systems to start with. Secondly, how can someone go from 6th dan to 9th dan? Don’t you have to go through 7 & 8 first? Thirdly, does this new found rank make him a better martial artist? (I doubt it does).
Now here is a question for Mr. Hubbard, since you refused to let the link to Bullshido remain which part of the Bullshido thread about Tim Hartman is inaccurate? [TrojanXL]

I'm not the only one against the link of that site. Lets make this easier. What part of it is accurate? You and others are the ones who wish to submit that into evidence. I believe the job of supporting the reason for it's inclusion is up to you to prove. --Bob Hubbard 02:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Addendum - "Posts to bulletin boards and Usenet, or messages left on blogs, are never acceptable as primary or secondary sources. This is because we have no way of knowing who has written or posted them." from here. Therefore the threads at Bullshido are not admissible under Wiki's rules, unless that information can be verified through a reliable source. So, what reliable and credible sources are there? My information comes from official press releases and news releases from both the IMAF and WMAA over the last 4 years, as well as accredited FMA Masters (4 of whom are Datus other than Tim Hartman). --Bob Hubbard 02:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

'I see. So we are going to play this little game. Alright then. Having read the thread on bullshido it seems that some of the posters knew him or know him and have dealt with him in the past. Since you claim to know Tim Hartman I will ask again, please give specific examples of which parts of the Bullshido thread are either false or inaccurate. I am asking you to clear the air on which parts are not correct according to you and your sources. All I have to go by is what I read since I am not I am Hartman’s inner circle and you are. This is your chance to clear things up and this fun discussion can come to a close.

As for sources and qualifying information for Wikipedia go, if I am reading your post right then all of my martial arts friends that say I am great at whatever art I do can be quoted here but not folks that don’t like what I do or have done. And the only thing that my friends need to be do is have them verified by wikipedia. So just how did wikipedia verify Hartman’s friends? Did they email each one of them or call them?'

I don't believe it's Wikipedias responsibility to verify it. They just set out the guidelines, which I linked to. The unverifiable anonymous folks at Bullshido aren't considered admissible here.

I see so if someone from say Martialtalk, another place with anonymous posters, comes here and writes something then they aren’t verifiable or credible according to the standards here.

Depends. Is it someone using a handle, or a verifiable name? But no, much of what is on MartialTalk is not, on it's own, acceptable as a "verified, credible source" either. Which is why I said multiple sources. --Bob Hubbard 07:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
The only "Real" person on that thread (as far as I can recall. I don't bother going there anymore), beside me, is Paul Martin. He asked the questions above that I answered. If any of the anonymous people in that thread would like to identify themselves publicly, and can verify their comments, then it might be admissible here. Otherwise, it's simply hearsay. You say "Some" of the posters knew him.
How do we know it's not just 1 person using separate accounts, which has happened here? You are the one who wishes to include that thread as evidence.

I think the folks at bullshido could find out pretty fast if it were only one person.

They could. They could also require supporting evidence to claims made on their site.--Bob Hubbard 07:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
It's your responsibility to independently verify the credibility of both the posters, and the comments, as message boards aren't considered acceptable sources here. It's not mine to discredit parts of it.
You happen to be the one saying that the claims made on Bullshido are false, I would like to know which ones. I am not claiming they are either. Going by your standard that means I would have to prove you are really Bob Hubbard and not Tim Hartman.

There are many claims on there, as well as alot of childish crap. Some of those claims, aren't very nice. Would be good to know how true they really are, or just how full of crap those making the comments are. Those claims could be very true, however, without credible, verifiable sources, they are just hearsay. As to verifying my identity, that is easily enough done. Send an email to "Bob Hubbard", easily contacted through any of the websites associated with him. Or, sign up at any of his forums and send him a PM. I will answer. --Bob Hubbard 07:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Have the negative or positive comments been said by any one credible, in a verifiable manner? I can name real people. Here's a few: What is the opinion of Datu Bong Jornales? He joined the WMAA. What is the opinion of Master Ray Galang? Tim was invited to participate in the Bakbakan event this year, he did, and has the medals to prove how well he did, against some of the top stick jocks in the US. What is the opinion of Datu Inocalla ? He welcomed Tim as a MA brother at an event in Blasdell NY recently (late 2003, after Tims promotion to 7th by the WMAA board). What is the opinion of Master Huk Planas? Seems they were doing events together this year. What is the opinion of the -only- other Punong Guro under Remy Presas, Punong Guro Myrlino P. Hufana? PG has taught at Tims camps, and invited Tim to teach at his event this past August. That's just a few "real people", with all facts verified by checking with the various press releases, news agencies, websites and seminar schedules of those individuals. More to the point, which name level FMA players have spoken out against anything he is doing? None that I am aware of. So, does it really matter what the opinions are of "Fartsniffer"? Nope, not in the least. They don't meet the Wiki-Acid Test. Same with your, or for that matter, my friends. Show me some notable folks who publicly list you as "kosher", it counts more than "HotRox55" saying it. Here's another question: Of the people making the claims, how many of them are his seniors, either in rank or time in? Here's another: Of those making these claims and asking these questions, how many are Full Time martial artists, and how many are part timers, club runners or just students? Seems the lower down the list you go, the less credible you would be to make judgements. That's my beef. Show me real people, who will say this in public, under their own name, and can back it up, and I say include it. Hearsay from what might be 1 disgruntled person, on a single site that is less than credible, isn't good enough for inclusion here, under this sites requirements. Show me verifiable data from credible sources, and I will back it's inclusion here. --Bob Hubbard 05:23, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I never heard of any of those people you mentioned. How do we know they really said that about Hartman? How can you prove it here? Just because it's on another website doesn't make it true.

If you don't know at least some of those individuals, then you don't know Modern Arnis or the FMA. Events can be verified by checking those individuals websites. In some cases, there is photo, video and writen evidence. In some, there isn't. In those cases, I can only offer my opinion on how people interacted at certain events. It is up to the reader to accept it, or reject it as they see fit. You are right though. Just because it's on a website, doesn't make it true. Or false. That requires supporting evidence, as required by Wiki and any other credible site. --Bob Hubbard 07:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Addendum - Re: FMA using JMA ranks. Remy was a Karate BlackBelt, and as Karate was the "in" thing in the PI at the time, adopted it, and some open hand katas for his system.
Re:6 to 9 jump. Yes, you do. Tim was promoted to 7th, then jumped to 9th. Other MA individuals have done similar. Dan Anderson went from 6th to 8th. Dr. Barber went from 3rd, to 5th I believe (See his Talk section for the full bio). Jeff Delaney went from 5th to 10th. I believe (and may be wrong) that some of the MOTTS also skipped levels.
Re:Rank making one better - Nope. No more than rank is any accurate measurement of anyones skill, especially when comparing across arts. Who is better - A 5th in Karate, a 5th in Kung Fu, or a 5th in Jack Daniels? It's even less meaningful when one doesn't actually test for rank, but has it issued. Tim tested for 6th, and passed. Other than Tim, who in Modern Arnis has tested past 3rd degree, and has anyone tested for 6th or higher since 2001? --Bob Hubbard 02:46, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Its ALL so much political crap and manuvering to be the "top dog" after Remy's death. Who, in the end, the burden of responsibility all falls back on for not having a solid rank structure or for selecting a successor. renegade68
Yes it is, and I agree with you. --Bob Hubbard 17:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Let's get somethings in perspective here:
Tim was invited to participate in the Bakbakan event this year, he did, and has the medals to prove how well he did, against some of the top stick jocks in the US. What is the opinion of Datu Inocalla ? He welcomed Tim as a MA brother at an event in Blasdell NY recently (late 2003, after Tims promotion to 7th by the WMAA board).
Tim participated in the 'light weapons' divisions such as knife not the 'heavy weapon' division. According to the stats posted there were not all that many players present for it to be against the 'top stick jocks in the US' because folks like Bart Hubbard wasn't there, and from what I understand he is fairly respectable in the WEKAF rankings...
I do recall Tim participating in at least 3 events, only 1 was knife. There was only 1 "live stick" event, and no, he didn't fight in that. I however don't recall seeing you there, or anyone from WNY not associated with the WMAA. 2005 East Coast Invitational Tournament ResultsI was. Photos and video from the event are available on MartialTalk where people can form their own opinions.--Bob Hubbard 20:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Second point about Shishir. Shishir welcomed everyone that came through the door. That was even AFTER Tim Hartman went to the host of teh Blasdell event and swore that he would not be attending because of issues with Jerome Barber and proceeded to bad mouth Jerome to the host when it was not asked for or welcome. If I remember correctly, he was even asked to leave by the host at that time. Yet he still showed up to the event (partly because Jerome ensured the host that there would be no problems) and refused Shishir's offer to act as mediator between Tim and Jerome. He refused a senior Datu's offer to discuss a way of mending fences. This of course is after he had refused on many occasions to discuss anything WITH Jerome, but insists on discussing JEROME to anyone that he can get to listen. This is on par with calling a certain someone's boss at work concerning internet chatter.
Can you prove what was said between Tim and the Host, or Tim and Shishir? You were there, or did you get the information 2nd hand? From who? What does he need to discuss with Jerome? More importantly, why does he "need" to talk to Jerome? As to this so called phone call, from what I've heard, there was no phone call made to this individuals boss.--Bob Hubbard 20:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Datu means "Chieftain" in Tagalog, such back stabbing behaviors do not smack of leadership to me.
There are also the reactions to Tim's attendance to a certain pair of West Coast events.... according to anecdotal accounts, he couldn't even recognize that he was getting jabbed by ethinc Phillipinos with Tagalog jokes like "pretty boy" because there were a number of attendees that did not find him all that impressive. Why don't you link the Anyos clip here to show how 'impressive' his form and power are?
There are many and various opinions about Tim Hartman's 'notability', and if the point is to reach a neutral point of view, they all deserve to be discussed even if folks don't like it.
Yes, if they can be verified. Who were these "ethinc Phillipinos" who were making the cracks? What were these events? Were you there? Where does your information come from? A lot of "fog" in your statement. As to video clips, there are videos in the links that were repeatedly defaced. The 'anyo' clip was removed as it was surplanted by a demo clip. As the original clip was the middle sequence in an instructional video, not a "look how fast I can whip my sticks" display, it's value as an indication of "power" is not applicable here. --Bob Hubbard 20:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
BTW, concerning Jerome Barber and promotions: NEVER has Jerome been promoted by a panel of people that were junior in rank AND could benefit from his promotion by creating room for their promotions... All recognitions and honors by seniors in the corresponding organizations.
Are we trying to justify Jerome's promotions and membership in a questionable organization, or damn Tim for his own organizational promotions and after the fact realization of these organizations lack of real worth?--Bob Hubbard 20:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
AND if the INTEGRITY and HONOR of Sokeship or World Hall of Fame orgs are so questionable, why does Tim have a few hanging in his lobby? If they are of such ill repute, I would have expected a Chieftain to refuse them out of sheer principle. The other thing to consider is that an organization is made up of people. If the organization is disreputable, the people are and SOME of those people were respected colleagues of Remy Presas and some are close business associates of Tim Hartman's. Dr. Gyi, for example has been a regular seminar instructor for Tim. If he was such a shady character because he associated with such shady organizations, then why is Tim in business with him?
why does Tim have a few hanging in his lobby? When did those go up? They haven't been on any walls that I've seen there. If they were displayed, it may have been briefly after his return from an event, but now lie gathering dust in a box somewhere. Maybe you've been in the school more recently than I? As to the credibility of those organizations, use google, and you will find numerous comments about their lack of credibility. The entry here for "soke" even mentions the misuse of the title. As to Gyi, From what I've heard, He and Remy were close friends. In fact, I believe that several if not all of the individuals who endorsed Tims 7th were Remys friends -and- business associates.--Bob Hubbard 20:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Libel: Not happening, the use of such melodramatic langauge along with terms such as e-stalking are the language of insecure, irrational and emotional responses. They are no different than threats to silence people or protect friends with drives to beat someone up. When such language is used regularly, it is the equivalent of cursing, because it is the sign of a weak position.
I notice Jerome had the moral courage to stand up and speak for himself, to clear up any issues of credibility. Where is Tim? Why, yet again, is Tim being 'defended' by lesser ranked/skilled and knowledgeable students - some of which preach respect but don't seem to show any to their 'seniors' in the arts?
I guess it is a selective form of 'respect' that is applied.
I respect those of my peers who have earned it. It's not given automatically just because of "time in" and some stripes on a belt. I know the true value of that belt, and it's $5 +S/H. I also have no respect for those who play internet games, or hide behind handles and such to smear people for kicks. It's why I use my full name, and sign my statements. Others don't have the same courage I've noted. Where is Tim? Above such things I suppose, with no desire to try to argue with a few locals who have issues with him. If my facts were inaccurate, I'm sure he'd pipe in, as he has in the past, to correct them. --Bob Hubbard 21:00, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
So Paul, let me ask you a few questions. Outside of yourself, Tom, Jerome, and maybe 3-4 other individuals in WNY, who cares? I notice that the WNY School Owners group has no problem with him. Why, he's even a member in good standing. The World Filipino Martial Arts Association welcomed him this year. Who else from WNY was on the roster? Tell ya what, who, that is not associated with either you or your associate/training partner/how ever you describe it, has issue with Tim, that isn't afraid to say it as themselves, in a verifiable manner? No hiding on a message board as "nosepicker" or "dungeater29". Which FMA masters have taken public issue with Tim Hartman? You are dealing with second and third hand information, from "anonymous" sources, which can't be verified or confirmed, or even simply checked. I have named names of Tims peers, fellow Datus, and other FMA Masters who appear to have no issue with him, to the extent that they do events together, and have seemed downright friendly when I was at these events. Seems if it was that big of a deal, that they wouldn't associate with him, regardless of the money involved. To me, thats integrity.--Bob Hubbard 20:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, Bob, it is "best" to post openly - except when such information can bite you because someone decides to use said personal info to contact your employers. But, in general, I would say that it is "best" to say things as yourself. But, as you have said, sometimes, you just can't say things as yourself - or do you forget such comments?
Please contact my employeer and tell him about all the time I waste here. :) --Bob Hubbard 22:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Nice side step on all the issues btw. Who cares? That ultimately is the point about standards, integrity, and honor. It isn't about who cares, it is about doing the right thing - even when no one is looking. It is about being consistent between word, deed and action. Such as assuming or accepting a 'leadership' position that is suppose to be an indicator of 'character' as well as 'skill' and having the 'character' to stand the scrutiny of publicity AND the 'skill' to warrant promotions, claims, and titles. Especially when the public exposure that puts you under the mircoscope is self generated! This is the price of being 'well known.'
You and many others from your self claimed "Hartman Camp" have said that people in Tim's ilk should be held to a higher standard...well here it is, and IMO he doesn't match up to all the hype that self generated publicity is trying to create. In essence, Tim's publicity is writing checks that his body can't cash IMO.
Your opinion is noted. As are the public displays of their own opinion by numerous well known and notable Modern Arnis and FMA masters, which outshine yours, In my opinion.--Bob Hubbard 22:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
If you notice, the point isn't a comparison/contrast between Tim and anyone else. It has always been about Tim 'the reality' actually matching Tim 'the well known.'
Jerome, as well as others that have accepted honors from WMHF's and Sokeships 'pay' for them... those 'payments' are no different than 'testing fees' or 'promotion fees' that are charged at most schools IMO.
Based on the 'purchased titles' argument, ANY promotion that the reciever paid for is questionable - does Tim charge testing fees/belt fees to his students? If so, are those 'questionable' promotions because students 'paid' for them? Why does Tim have such 'questionable' honors hanging in his own lobby?
Tim doesn't charge for promotions or tests under Black within his school. I've seen long time students, and friends, fail their black belt tests at the camps. As to soke councils credibility, I have received 2 invitations to join them, and I hold no dan rank. So, how credible is an organization that invites a no-rank to become a "soke"? --Bob Hubbard 22:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Oh, and the 'above such things' explanation of is weak. When is a man's 'integrity' ever beneath him to discuss if he has a solid position? Based on that logic, it is 'beneath him' to discuss himself - the closest source to valid and factual information about the topic. But, it isn't 'beneath' any of his juniors - does that mean that anyone arguing as the mouth of Hartman is 'beneath' him as well? Please. If it was lead by example, then none of you would be here talking. This is an example of leading from the rear not 'high ground' ethics IMO.
Ok, your 'opinion' is noted. Now, do you have any verifiable, credible facts to add to this?--Bob Hubbard 22:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Many times, I have read how you are 'done with this' discussion. Logically, if it was 'leadership by example' then the followers would be as silent as Tim is on these issues. They would believe in Tim so much that our comments, critiques, and alternate perspectives would not cause so much commentary. It would simply be ignored since it is 'beneath' all WMAA members and Tim's skill, integrity, and character would stand without such junior support.
I believe that several if not all of the individuals who endorsed Tims 7th were Remys friends -and- business associates
Your right. But, then again, it was still a board of juniors that promoted him. Also, if it is fine for Tim to use 'endorsements' as proof of credibility, why is it wrong for those that are 'endorsed' (because no one is 'promoted') by a Sokeship council or Hall of Fame organizaiton. BTW, Tim was the one that told me directly that his Hall of Fame type awards didn't mean anything...as he gestured to where they hung in the lobby. He said himself to me that the only reason he hangs them is because they are good for business....
Well, all I can say is, I haven't seen them (the awards) in quite some time now, at least a year, maybe more. I was in the school last week. When were you last there again? As I said, other than a few local non-players making comments, a few non-FMA trolls jumping in for giggles, and 1 "name", I see nothing. Where are the major FMA players who are outraged? Who in fact were these guys who promoted Tim? Hmm...In numerical rank, yup, they are his juniors. In "time in" though, looks like a few are Senior to him. Jeff Leader started prior to Tim. Chad Dulin holds rank under Remy Presas, and George Dillman. Ingmar Johansson holds rank in EPAK as well as Arnis. Rick Manglinong holds rank under both Ernesto and Remy Presas, and is also Tims "Time in" senior. These are 3 of those "WMAA Board Members" who are Tims "Students" that promoted him. Sorry, again the whine "His students promoted him, isnt that evil!" refrain doesn't hold up under a careful examination of just who those students are. In fact, I think each of them are on their own "notable" arnisadors in their own right. So I again ask, other than a couple of non-notable WNYers, who cares? --Bob Hubbard 22:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
BTW...Shishir/Jerome/Tim mediation: That was direct from Shishir after he made the offer, while I was walking with Jerome and him. It happend, or Shishir lied. I doubt the second at this point.
Calling of Bosses: The version I have is direct from the recieving end (and NOT the party affected). Tim called according to him, the recipient of the call. Also, in this particular case, a co-worker (and associate/student of Tim's) made a comment about Tim making the call...two sources. One direct contact with the reciever, the other direct contact with the sender....
In both above examples, my sources are empirical...next.
And you are? Hard to follow who's who when you don't take the time to sign your comments. Why should I take the words of an IP address as canon?--Bob Hubbard 22:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Come on Bob, you've taken the time to track it for so long, you should know it by heart.
I do, but figured I'd let you come clean, rather than continue to play games. --Bob Hubbard 03:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I would say it was hastiness and not gaming. Coming clean about gamesmanship....that would be novel and the 'best' way to go wouldn't it. Goodness knows that playing games can lead to red blades if people are willing to drive the distance. I really thought that you were done with this though, if we could go on your word that is.
That was in reference to Robert. Not the other sockpuppets playing here. But, for the most part, most of my argument is already laid out, and I highly doubt that the WNYers that are active here in trying to somehow make Tim look bad will be able to bring anything credible and verifiable to the table. I mean, so far, it's been little more than "dis guy sed" quality stuff.--Bob Hubbard 06:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, some of the 'dis guy sed' stuff was directly from the words of folks like Shishir Inocalla, credible professionals, and Tim Hartman himself so the word of a Datu (two actually) doesn't hold any weight? Nor does a professional c.servant? Even if you call it 'secondary information' because I am not saying that I saw it directly but am getting it from direct sources instead, that is pretty credible stuff to me. In research and journalism circles, that would be known as an INTERVIEW, and generally taken with a certain amount of credibility. I have also laid out clearly where promotion practices used by the WMAA are consistent with Conflict of Interest guidelines in most major legitimate businesses (GE was cited). Along with that is a rational line of logic that addresses the issue of invalid evaluators of a 'skill promotion' when they are junior in rank to the person that they are promoting. Again, freshmen students do not score Senior exit exams or college entry exams nor do junior officers in the military decide on promotions of senior officers. Such practices would be considered invalid based on the lack of experience. The most commonly accepted practice for skill evaluation is seniors evaluating juniors not the other way around. I have also offered alternatives that could have been used instead of a board of directors that were admitted friends and junior ranks to Tim 'promoting' him.
And this information is documented where? In fact, I think you did say you saw it direct, though with all you anonymous folks running around and bluring things, it does get dizzying to try and keep your comments straight. Again, I have pointed out where your facts on just who did the promotion are in error. For example, Rick Manglinong has never been a student of Tim Hartmans yet there is the constant call of "Tim was promoted by his students". Chad Dulin is not one of Tims students either. The individuals in question hold rank under other instructors, and are accomplished and experienced martial artists in their own right, all I might add with more rank and "time in" than those involved here. I would trust their judgement over that of those engaged in this debate, my own included. So, please point me at a credible website, magazine or other such acceptable source for your conclusions as "Well I heard from this guy who heard it first hand" is not as they say "Admissible in court."--Bob Hubbard 07:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
BTW, if Tim is already the 'President' of WMAA - why would any belt rank promotions (Which are generally associated with skill improvement) be necessary? If the point was that the promotion was in recognition for leadership...isn't the title 'President' enough?
Because there may be a time where he is not? I dunno, their org, they make the policies.--Bob Hubbard 07:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Keep side stepping the issues and attempting to minimize the commentors. It lends nothing to the credibility of the issue, addresses NONE of the points made, and is an attempt at distractions from the issue. Tim is making publicitiy claims and is getting critiqued about the validity of the practices and the quality of the implications. The rest is meaningless if it does not deal with those issues.
One also must look at who is doing the critiquing, and anonymous doesn't cut it. As I said, I see a couple of people who are in some way associated with another local instructor. None of those making these claims are "notable", or even Tims peers, but his juniors in all aspects. None of his peers or seniors are taking public exception with his actions, and are in fact more than happy to work with him. SO, who has the most credibility here? Recognized leaders and notable masters, or part timers who are for the most part, nobodies in the arts? Note, my opinion falls in the lower end of the middle there, as I have some "notable" status, if only as indicated previously as an admin of 2 succesful martial arts forums, and president of a corporation, abet a small one. (That and $1.25 will get you a drink at McD. btw.) --Bob Hubbard 07:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Tim doesn't charge for promotions or tests under Black within his school. I've seen long time students, and friends, fail their black belt tests at the camps. As to soke councils credibility, I have received 2 invitations to join them, and I hold no dan rank. So, how credible is an organization that invites a no-rank to become a "soke"? --Bob Hubbard 22:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

So, Tim charges for BB tests. Does that mean that Tim's students 'buy' their rank? No. Were either of your invites from Sokeship council groups affilitated with any of the above mentioned names such as Dr. Gyi, George Dillman or other long standing colleagues/associates/peers of Remy PResas? Again, if the point is that these groups are illegitimate, then these members are also illegitimate by association/affilitation. You can't respect the people if you don't respect the organizations they are affiliated with now can you? If not, you also should not be lumping them into one spectrum of quality or integrity, that would be profiling, and we all know how wrong that is.
Well, if Tim is guilty of "selling rank" by this definition, so is every other school I've seen. As to the Sokeships, to be honest, I don't remember which of the 50+ "soke councils" sent them. I didn't keep the letters, and it was in 2002. Heres a novel thought, why not take some time, follow accepted procedure here, sign your comments, and stick to credible and verifiable information. Good or bad. This "I heard" and "These guys at this event said" stuff doesn't hold water. One would expect more from educators, civil servants, and such. Draw a line below, post whatever questions you still have that haven't been answered above. We can build the TIMFAQ. Lol.--Bob Hubbard 07:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
People have been lumping all martial arts together for a very long time and that is neither fair or accurate presentation. It is assumption. If it is wrong for people to assume that Karate is the same as Kung Fu or that School A is the same as School B simply because they are within the same art, then it is just as wrong to assume that because Soke group A is substandard, that every other one is substandard. Besides, what is the point of mentioning sokeship councils even before anyone (meaning Jerome) mentioned sokeship endorsements? It had no bearing on a discussion concerning Hartman and rank promotions? Besides, Tim congradulated Dan Anderson for a council endorsement of his MA-80 curriculum, yet he looks insincere (and mocking) if the general opinion is that such groups are just money making machines.
I believe it was brought up by someone else. That whole "it would be nice if you folks whould take the time and show the courtacy in signing you comments" thing.--Bob Hubbard 07:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
'So what isn't holding water? The word of SHishir Inocalla, Tim Hartman or c.Servants? As an educator, I know the value of interview sources. I know that they are considered as valid if not more valid than some other forms of documentation. Besides, you wrote "version" when referring to the calling of bosses. What 'version' did you have? What was your source for that 'version?' Citations please. Lead by example.
So, you are admitting that you are passing judgement on any and all Sokeship councils as a whole based on minimal research/contact and possibly hearsay from others? That doesn't sound very fair. Thank you for validating my own ideas about 'purchasing' of ranks. It isn't a bought rank simply because you are charged a processing fee. Thanks again. Here's a novel thought right back at you. How about you take the time to do more than cursory investigations yourself before you start bad mouthing an entire group of organizations. Worry about typing procedures on your own site.
So far I haven't seen any 'valid' responses to questions, only questions on top of questions. Since you know who I am, and can check the history to see if your not sure, how about dealing with the issue instead of harping about procedures. If I read accurately, the comment you are referring to simply reiterated that entries from named accounts hold more wt than anonymous entries. Click history if you can't tell.'
Of course. Your rules Paul. I forgot. That's why we're here on Usenet, Oh wait, this site has policies and procedures that you and your "similarly minded WNYers" there are choosing to ignore. I've looked into those organizations, and not been impressed, especially by those that induct people against their will, then refuse to stop dropping their names as "members". But, on to your points - Where is Shishir quoted saying this? I haven't seen it on any forums or websites under his name. - Where is this aledged "interview" published? I doubt a couple of comments over coffee or in a parking lot constitues an interview. - I have the version I got from Tim Hartman. I do have to correct myself. I spoke to him today, there was a phone call involved, after several of this civil servants coworkers has indicated he was in the wrong. Note, several is more than 2 here.
So again Paul, I ask. Other than You (Paul Martin), Tom Gerace, "RickRed" there, and Dr. Jerome Barber, who in the Modern Arnis community is on public record (please include where, when, and how it was recorded) cares about the matters you yourself have brought forth here? Can you name any FMA players? You haven't listed anything credible. "He told me" is second hand. Where is "he" on record?
What questions of yours haven't been answered? Here is the "TIMFAQ". It's my work, and I take the blame for any errors.
Q- Who promoted Tim Hartman to 9th Degree? A- The World Modern Arnis Alliance Board of Directors.
Q- Aren't these his juniors in the arts? A- Yes and no. The WMAA BOD is made up of leading members of the WMAA on a rotating basis. Some of these members hold rank in Modern Arnis issued by Remy Presas, some of them hold rank in other FMA systems, some hold rank in other non-FMA systems. Some hold rank under the WMAA. Some have been training longer, and some shorter.
Q- Aren't these his students? A- Yes and no. The WMAA BOD is made up of leading members of the WMAA on a rotating basis. Some of these members have trained under Datu Hartman. Some have not.
Q- What is the opinion of the other Modern Arnis organizations? A- Each Modern Arnis organization is independent of the others and operate without obligation to the others. They set their own guidelines for promotion.
Q- Don't the other FMA Masters have problems with a board consisting of an instructors students and juniors promoting him? A- As indicated above, the WMAA BOD consists of members with a wide range of experience. The overall opinion seems to range from it being a non-issue to acceptance.
Q- That's not an answer. Hasn't there been a great deal of controversy surrounding this promotion? A- No. There has been a limited amount of outcry from a few individuals on Internet message boards, often operating under anonymous handles, however no major names have come out against this promotion.
Q- Who are the FMA and Modern Arnis masters who have taken issue with this promotion? A- Unknown.
Q- How does this promotion rank in the Modern Arnis community? A- The Board wishes to emphasize the fact that Datu Hartman's Lakan Siyam rank refers to his rank within the WMAA. His rank from Prof. Presas is Lakan Anim, 6th degree black belt. The Board also wishes to reiterate that it is the position of the WMAA that all Modern Arnis Datus are equal in status. This numerical rank is within this organization, internal to the WMAA, and does not imply that Datu Hartman is ranked either above or below any other Datu with higher or lower numerical rank.
This FAQ is non-official, and based on comments here, and is not endorsed by the WMAA.

Thanks for the pile of "Yes and NO" none answer to your own questions. You have not specified the ranks, arts, titles of the members of the board that promoted Tim though. You have not been able to LIST or CITE the volumous research on the many sokeship councils that you have looked into to evaulate their integrity and quality wholistically. You have NOT answered any of the specific questions concerning members of Sokeship councils.
Paul, I thought this was about Tim, not Soke councils? Start a discussion on the Soke entry if you want to debate their validity. I don't have to justify why I think they are bunk to you, here. Anyway, here is why your "So and So said, and they are credible because I heard it right from them" doesn't wash. --Bob Hubbard 16:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Verifiability, not truth
Articles in Wikipedia should refer to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have been published by a reputable or credible publisher. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.
A good way to look at the distinction between verifiability and truth is with the following example. Suppose you are writing a Wikipedia entry on a famous physicist's Theory X. Theory X has been published in peer-reviewed journals and is therefore an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article. However, in the course of writing the article, you meet the physicist, and over a beer, he tells you: "Actually, I think Theory X is a load of rubbish." Even though you have this from the author himself, you cannot include the fact that he said it in your Wikipedia entry.
Why not? Because it is not verifiable in a way that would satisfy the Wikipedia readership or other editors. The readers don't know who you are. You can't include your telephone number so that every reader in the world can call you directly for confirmation. And even if they could, why should they believe you?
For the information to be acceptable to Wikipedia, you would have to persuade a reputable news organization to publish your story first, which would then go through a process similar to peer review. It would be checked by a reporter, an editor, perhaps by a fact-checker, and if the story were problematic, it would be checked further by the lawyers and the editor-in-chief. These checks and balances exist to ensure that only accurate and fair stories appear in the newspaper.
It is this fact-checking process that Wikipedia is not in a position to provide, which is why the no original research and verifiability policies are so important.
If the newspaper published the story, you could then include the information in your Wikipedia entry, citing the newspaper article as your source.

SOme answers please. If you have done the research, it should just be a matter of looking through notes.
You and a few others are the ones making the claim that it was "Tims Students" who promoted him. I have indicated where you are in error. It is your responsibility to validate your claim. But, here is some information: Rick Manglinong holds a 5th in Kombatan, 5th in TKD and at least a 2nd in Modern Arnis. He has over 20 years teaching experience. Sounds pretty qualified to me, and is not Hartmans student. Oh, as to verifiable, this profile was published in the August 2003 MartialTalk Magazine. It's in the bio on his website. It's also been mentioned in some event flyers. Chad Dulin holds rank in Okinawan and Korean styles (I don't have complete information) as well as rank in George Dillmans DKI and Modern Arnis. I don't have the exact ranks, but I believe he holds a 3rd in Arnis, and a 5th under Dillman. Neither are Rick nor Chad are Tims students, but peers I would say.--Bob Hubbard 17:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I think the thing to remember here is that: 1. You are taking Tim's word on issues over anyone elses. In the case of Shishir, I have it straight from him and none other. Published...so what. It is an account of a conversation. I imagine if you bothered to call Shishir to verify anything, he could tell you the truth. It is up to you, with the doubt, to clarify what was really said. But, chances are you won't bother calling. It is easier to go on 'secondary sources' which would include Tim as an interviewee in this case. If my direct account of Shishirs conversation is invalid in your mind, then Tim's is just as questionable as a source. Gee, where have I had this discussion before.
Calling Shishir to prove this is meaningles, unless you say his phone number should be published here so that everyone reading can verify it directly?--Bob Hubbard 16:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
2. Tim's account of 'fellow co-workers' saying that 'he' was in the wrong is loaded with holes:
A. They never read the information directly. At best, they were working from Tim Hartman's interpretation of the information as well as his arm-chairing of intent. So, any reactions were based on limited, second hand information from a biased source.
B. Tim called 'his boss' instead of the individual he had issue with. This was AFTER Tim's offer of making introductions between the two involved parties (which he was not because he was never mentioned in any information) and then publically made it sound like he was being bullied. Tim's interpretation was proven inaccurate given the private message attachements that were posted. Tim never called 'him' back to settle the issue, which was part of the discussions.
Basically, Tim tried to leave the impression that he was getting bullied when 'he' actually called Tim (because Tim offered) that did not hold up when written evidence was presented. He was doing this on your forum (why don't you attach a link to the whole discussion - unaltered please), chances are he was still feeding the same 'victim' interpretation to anyone that would listen.
Because discussion on web forums is not accepted here as a verifiable credible source, and therefore is not admisible.--Bob Hubbard 16:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
BTW...
"Several" is an ambiguous term that has no clear numerical value associated with it. It is a generalization. "2" on the other hand, is a very precise number.
If the credibility of my sources is in question because it is 'he said' stuff in your opinion, then why is it okay for you to say 'he said' when using Tim as a source? Double standard IMO.
No, the credibility is in question because it is non-verifiable. "Pick up a phone and call them then" is not an accepted answer here. You asked, I answered. Neither your aledged sources nor mine are admissible here.--Bob Hubbard 16:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Also, don't confuse silence with approval or lacking concern. Silence or non responses are subject to interpretation. Alone, 'non response' are meaningless.
And your point is? They aren't concerned with this matter to the extent that they wil speak out about it. Therefore, it is a non-issue, to all but a few WNYers who have personal axes to grind with Hartman. You cannot show me anyone credible and verifiable who does though. You are the one who this promotion bothers, it is your responsibility to use credible and verifiable sources to detail your position. I have already stated independantly verifiable sources of non-problem, as simply looking at the schedules of those FMA masters listed previously will show they are working and socializing with TIm, after this so-called "highly unusual" promotion.--Bob Hubbard 16:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if it is only a handful of people or a large population, conflict of interest citations, basic logic and integrity are issues that generally not dictated by popular vote. I happen to remember a few post topics that were intended to 'expose the dark' on issues. How is this 'wrong' when it was 'right' for you to do?
Again, personal differences between editors do not belong on Wiki. Your reference to 'expose the dark' is to a matter of disagreement between us that happened elsewhere.--Bob Hubbard 16:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Aren't you the publisher/editor/contributing writer/owner of MartialTalk Magezine?
Yes. And it is an unbiased, accessible by anyone publication. I believe it to be admissible.--Bob Hubbard 18:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the incomplete info concerning names, rank, and art of the board members involved in Tim's promotions. I did notice a 5th in there somewhere. How nice that Tim's promotion
recognizes Datu Hartman's technical skill and his leadership role in Modern Arnis; it also places him at the apex of the rank chain in the WMAA, as befits the Technical Director and President of the organization. This will allow him to promote other WMAA members, such as those currently holding the rank of 5th degree black belt, to appropriate ranks within the WMAA in the future.
Your right, no conflict of interest there is there? Also I notice that the idea that skill was mentioned....and that was evaluated by, at the highest, a 5th degree in the art? Sure that is a valid practice.
I gave what information I have, which can be independantly verified through sources such as Google. The comment you made concerning 5ths was when Tim was a 6th, and tradition states that you cannot promote to your own level. Tims promotion to 9th, and leaving the 10th for Remy effectively caps advancement under the WMAA organization at a maximum of 8th. Then again, since you brought up skill, and seem to be concerned with the credibility of those making the determination, what rank are you, and how long have you been training? Also, under what instructors did you earn said rank?--Bob Hubbard 18:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
If it isn't 'admissible' (which it is or it would have been removed by admins) then don't enter it. Lead by example. It simply means that the information is not as 'verifiable' or 'valid' as other information might be considered. I think I have made it very clear. It is your job to validate such practices to support your position. I have been supportin my position.
No Paul, they aren't here to check your facts and fictions. I posted the policy of this site, which you continue to ignore in posting your heresay.--Bob Hubbard 18:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
As far as the WNY'ers that have a problem with the promotion practice. It is logical that those that could be geographically and artistically (FMA's, "Arnis") associated with Tim might have issue with such promotion practices since there are clear legitimate business guidelines that suggest that it creates a conflict of interest - therefore could impact the impression of FMA'ers/MA'ers as a whole.
As I said, a small handful (less than 10) individuals, local to Tim have this problem. The numerous FMA and non-FMA instructors he teaches with don't appear to have a problem. He's been invited to major events, taught with major names, and participated in major tournaments, all without problem. (See past discussion for specifics). You, and the "Camp Barber" gang are the only people who seem to have these issues, and you cannot back up your claims with credible and verifiable evidence. You might have better luck on a site like BS or USENET, which don't have strict editorial guidelines, or require you actually present evidence outside heresay and personal opinion. --Bob Hubbard 18:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I have yet to see any serious, thorough, or 'valid' answers to some of my specific questions.
I have answered your questions. You choose not to accept the answers because they do not support your unsupportable position. Restate your questions then, below. --Bob Hubbard 18:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Never mind, I did it for you. I hope this is clear enough. --Bob Hubbard 18:32, 29 December 2005 (UTC)