I missed that. Thanks
hell, the dude doesnât look like he was even alive in 1978
1 Like
I believe that picture is just a meme of Tim Robinson (comedian born in 1981)
I donât think I got the first e-mails, but I just got one that Daino co-wrote with Rockinâ Robbin and Super Grover about a response to the CAS letter that I assume was the response to those e-mails you discussed. Iâm guessing that E(X) where X = the percentage of CAS membership that give a shit is <10%.
[geek]Should be discuss the relative merits of guessing X<10%, or E(X)<10%, or median of X<10%. All good guesses, with the last two slightly more likely to be true IMO,[/geek]
The third email:
Dear CAS Members:
We want to let CAS members know about an online meeting that a select group of CAS leaders invited us to attend, but which they abruptly cancelled. The meeting had been scheduled for August 4, 2021. We were ready to discuss our concerns candidly and courteously. We provided a robust agenda, with time evenly and fairly divided between both sides. We provided material detailing our objections to both the substance and processes the CAS has been using over the last year. We proposed potential compromises to resolve issues.
90 minutes before the meeting was scheduled to start, they cancelled the meeting.
They could have proposed revisions to the agenda.
They could have provided their own material to rebut the material we provided.
They could have offered different compromises.
But, instead, they decided to abort the entire discussion.
They sent an email that can only be regarded as rude, disingenuous, deceitful, and unprofessional. While strong in our convictions and principles, we remain open to discussion and compromise.
The CAS leadership group acted defensively and in a hostile authoritarian fashion. In its August 4th email, the CAS leadership made clear it is not going to listen to opposing views. Instead, they say â we will not entertain further debate on the question of ⌠DEI initiatives .â Further debate? There never has been debate on this. That is one of our requests: a forum to debate these type issues and policy positions.
In their two emails they imply we are unprofessional, providing misstatements, lie about the long-term effects of concentrating power in the CEO, and violated the AAA Code of Professional conduct by sending emails to CAS members (more on all this on the website).
We believe they are not being honest and open with you, the membership. We are determined to have true transparency and openness so you can judge for yourself whether these accusations are true, or something else is true. And have free, serious, dialogue about what has and is happening at the CAS. The only filter on the www.WeLoveTheCAS.com will be to remove vile, name-calling, cursing, or comments totally irrelevant to the CAS.
Itâs their way or the highway dear CAS members.
This whole tone is profoundly disturbing.
They offer you several things to read or watch, all following the narrative they control. No dissension, no member interaction, no time for proper deliberation. Just do it their way. Or go to our website and participate in a first amendment, free exchange of ideas, messy as that can get at times.
Our basic objections, as detailed on our website, boil down to these:
The CAS Board adopted a revised Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) strategy and pursued various new DEI initiatives that are wholly at odds with the purpose of our professional organization. They set race and gender goals.The CAS Constitution prohibits the CAS from taking political, public policy positions, let alone promoting and endorsing radical left ideologies, conservative ideologies, or any political ideologies for that matter.
But many of the pronouncements made by the Board about DEI are fundamentally political public policy in nature. We show on the website that these issues are extremely divisive, political, public policy issues, and thus unconstitutional. The open discussions on our website prove this.
Leadership claims they have your support because of a 2018 survey. That survey was taken years before the âsystemic racismâ and âequityâ concepts infiltrated the narratives, and before race goals for membership were established. We all want to see a diverse and inclusive membership, but the narrative has shifted from the reasonably moderate Diversity and Inclusion initiatives to the far left CRT equity narrative. We donât see anywhere in the By-laws or the Constitution that a survey can be used to override the provisions of our Constitution.
The CAS is promoting gender dysphoria and transgenderism, which the CAS Constitution also prohibits because they, too, are extremely complex and divisive political, public policy positions. These issues also generated extremely divisive and angry comments on the website.
The CAS Constitution and policies need serious improvements, which we delineate in the agenda material youâll see on the website. One of our proposals is to add a Constitutional provision making it explicit that there will be no race or identity-based scoring of exams.
The CAS needs more inclusive processes. There needs to be a forum on the CAS website for members to make comments, even critical comments, about actions and statements proposed by leadership.
Lastly, we will not be silenced by the CAS leadership. They claim we are violating the CAS Terms of Use. We disagree and are fully prepared to defend ourselves and our rights. We admonish the CAS Leadership and ask them to reconsider. Their attempt to crush opposing views comes from a mindset of censorship flooding our country that is contrary to the way actuaries approach issues with data and logic.
Please go to www.WeLoveTheCAS.com or write to us via Bob Dainoâs email. Let your voices be heard!
The CAS 8-4 email echoes what we said in our 8-2 email earlier in the week:
This is your professional society.
You have the power to direct what is done here.
Board Nominees: we have a special post of two questions for you. Kindly help the membership know where you stand.
If the email above offends you in any way, weâre truly sorry. Simply unsubscribe and youâll never get another email from us. The CAS Directory is in the public domain, and the Terms of Use they mention are practically useless in court or in an ABCD hearing. Just click unsubscribe please.
With great hope for the future of the CAS,
Respectfully submitted,
Dr. Ira Robbin ACAS 2015
Grover Edie FCAS 1987
Bob Daino, FCAS 1978
Going to contact all their employers. Theyâll get the Amy Cooper treatment.
2 Likes
The third email would be a little more credible if it werenât for the nature of what was reported to be on the website. (I havenât looked, and from the comments made here, I donât want to.)
At least Amy was heat of the moment. E-mails like these would take forever.
Take a look at his web site. I peeked at it today, and heâs added a screed he sent to the CAS that i can only describe as âŚ
You know, i canât really describe it. Letâs just say i hope i never cross paths with the guy.
3 Likes
[edit] Iâm misread this and youâre saying âdoes SCSU know that one of their faculty is involved with thisâ - which, who knows, and I donât know what action theyâd take.
The whole thing is, ⌠as I alluded to previously, Iâd like to discuss more interesting things like when one should and shouldnât interpolate, ideas for accurately interpolating development factors in the 1-12 month period, the focus on eliminating the error term in predictions that pretends we can accurately identify sources of uncertainty or predict inherent randomness, and on and on.
Has anyone here reported these guys to the ABCD yet?
Are the ABCD not on the distribution list?
Iâm sure there is at least one CAS member on ABCD who would have been on the recipient list.
They may or may not view this as a violation of the Code of Professional Conduct to make the report themselves.
I would think Precept 13 applies to all of us, if this is an apparent material code violation.
I can see it now:
More seriously, were someone going to make a referral, the best course of action at the moment might be to keep feeding this faction rope with which to hang themselves. There is probably enough there to start an investigation, but for where this could (should?) probably end up, a referral based on what has happened at the moment probably doesnât get real far unless the targets of the complaint start violating Precept 14. The longer this goes, the deeper the hole they probably dig.
I suspect the 3rd e-mail is going to be a breaking point. Even if there was a meeting scheduled, the CAS has the right to say âwait, weâre calling this offâ for reasons the CAS doesnât have to disclose in real-time (or ever). If there was no meeting scheduled, a referral to the ABCD is probably the least of the concerns of this faction.
1 Like
I had a meeting that was important to me once and the other people cancelled before it could happen.
I reacted the same way any mature person would. Wrote a 1500 word hiss fit into an email and sent it to anyone who might have ever done business with that party.
2 Likes
Is this the same Ira Robbin that has written exam papers for exam 9?
If it is, it is kinda ironic that he is an ACAS.
1 Like
Yes, thereâs a good chance you sat for exam 9 with him in the same room taking the test.
If he has tenure, this is the sort of thing that tenure protects.