Organization & Operation revisited

[Villain]

I've read and reread the posts in this thread forwards and backwards.

The post below, on p. 5, was the first volley in the war:

You entered my thread and responded to me, not the other way around. I don't go into your Chicago fantasy threads and argue with you. You then tried to take us down a rabbit hole on Saint Gus Alex as a shield for your belief that Chicago is "different," that it doesn't follow the mafia structure, when the made members of that family and others providing info on Chicago don't make any reference to the things you are claiming. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

Good day to you.

Ever since I read that post, I've contemplated directly reporting it to Sol because Angelo is a moderator of this main forum, but it's always wise to see how a thread with flame posts develops. Later I realized I would also definitely need to report a number of Villain's posts, as well as some others'. Then I reminded myself that if I report these posts, Sol is going to tell me he doesn't appreciate my telling him how to run his site.

Villain's response to Angelo's insults has been disproportionate, both in this thread and in "The Mob Archeologists Podcast hosted by Antiliar, B, Tony and myself" thread. Conversely, Villain has been accused of having a "hostile attitude" and being a "bullshit artist," with his accusers -- who forgot what gave rise to his insults -- being given the benefit of the doubt.

I am somewhat friendly with a few posters here on TBHF but for the most part I make the effort not to be sociable with people on organized-crime forums. I especially discourage posters from sending me PMs with particular insights and questions about crime figures, murders, attempted murders, etc. Those who are knowledgeable with my posts over the years know I have contacted law-enforcement agencies with details that might help them with their investigations of murders, for example.

Objective posters like me see why this thread was created in the first place, and we scratched our heads because we see that a moderator is allowed to criticize Scott Burnstein in his OP -- is Angelo himself accusing Scott of lying? -- while the considerable number of posters who have been critical of Scott just recently learned that they have to tone down such criticism. And of course Pogo and Wiseguy were singled out by Sol for their posts. Scott and I follow each other's accounts on Twitter. I advised him to contact the owner of Gangster BB so that the posts over there, where Scott's Gangster Report articles are copy-pasted in their entirety, get taken down -- I even provided Scott with the site owner's email address.

From my standpoint, which I think is objective, the reason for the creation of this thread seems mostly to be about a beef between PolackTony and Villain in another thread. Up until recently, Tony had last visited the site on February 20, and I genuinely worried that he was done with this place or that some unfortunate event or circumstance in his life had befallen him. But he emerged again when this current thread became contentious. On a number of levels, the optics don't look right all around. I see a concerted effort to run Villain off the board.

I will be reporting this whole thead, as well as "The Mob Archeologists Podcast hosted by Antiliar, B, Tony and myself" thread, to Sol. In doing so, I might get clipped -- I see this almost as a foregone conclusion -- but being banned is a risk I'm willing to take. Before I send a message to Sol, I'm not going to pull a JD move by deleting all my posts. And if this current post of mine is my last ever on TBHF, I'll bid you all adieu.

Thats brave and im with you, meaning you should report all of the posts (including mine) 100% and lets finish this once and for all.

I wanted to do the same because a mod threatened me with a ban (allegedly through a joke) because I went against his claims, but I changed my mind (same as you) and deleted my msg to Sol....but dont forget, theres a ruling panel on this forum and all of the guys are friends.

[Wiseguy]

39A.gif

[OcSleeper]

I will be reporting this whole thead, as well as "The Mob Archeologists Podcast hosted by Antiliar, B, Tony and myself" thread, to Sol. In doing so, I might get clipped -- I see this almost as a foregone conclusion -- but being banned is a risk I'm willing to take. Before I send a message to Sol, I'm not going to pull a JD move by deleting all my posts. And if this current post of mine is my last ever on TBHF, I'll bid you all adieu.

Whether or not I'm right, I see this post being created by Angelo in direct response to the Non Italians in Chciago post but I don't think it was malicious in anyway. I think this is a fantastic post that helps show the difference between operational and organizational aspects of LCN. But it has gotten personal with insults being thrown and shit being started in other posts, specifically by Villain and as a Mod maybe Angelo shouldn't have indirectly threatened someone with a ban even as a joke. There's blame on both sides in this. Mods should've put a stop to that crap 15 pages ago and I know Antiliar did speak up but that clearly didn't fix anything as beefs were still taken place in here. I don't agree there's some concerted effort against Villain, I only see people with other views than him getting frustrated.

Anti, you shouldn't get banned or even be worried about being banned for reporting things when they get out of hand and Mods aren't doing their job. This shouldn't even have to be said.

It'd be a shame if this crap resulted in anyone being kicked off or leaving the forum. Everyone involved are extremely knowledgeable posters that make the forum what it is. It's just disappointing this disagreement has resulted in this. Hopefully going forward both sides of this discussion can present their views civilly and show respect for eachother like they normally do.

[chin_gigante]

A9F3CCDE-3EBA-46CD-92C9-C5DDAE7B21C5.jpeg

[InCamelot]

I will be reporting this whole thead, as well as "The Mob Archeologists Podcast hosted by Antiliar, B, Tony and myself" thread, to Sol. In doing so, I might get clipped -- I see this almost as a foregone conclusion -- but being banned is a risk I'm willing to take. Before I send a message to Sol, I'm not going to pull a JD move by deleting all my posts. And if this current post of mine is my last ever on TBHF, I'll bid you all adieu.

Whether or not I'm right, I see this post being created by Angelo in direct response to the Non Italians in Chciago post but I don't think it was malicious in anyway. I think this is a fantastic post that helps show the difference between operational and organizational aspects of LCN. But it has gotten personal with insults being thrown and shit being started in other posts, specifically by Villain and as a Mod maybe Angelo shouldn't have indirectly threatened someone with a ban even as a joke. There's blame on both sides in this. Mods should've put a stop to that crap 15 pages ago and I know Antiliar did speak up but that clearly didn't fix anything as beefs were still taken place in here. I don't agree there's some concerted effort against Villain, I only see people with other views than him getting frustrated.

Anti, you shouldn't get banned or even be worried about being banned for reporting things when they get out of hand and Mods aren't doing their job. This shouldn't even have to be said.

It'd be a shame if this crap resulted in anyone being kicked off or leaving the forum. Everyone involved are extremely knowledgeable posters that make the forum what it is. It's just disappointing this disagreement has resulted in this. Hopefully going forward both sides of this discussion can present their views civilly and show respect for eachother like they normally do.

Agreed. And if we want to further analyze where things went wrong with this thread it should probably be done elsewhere.

[InCamelot]

I get the viability factor. For clarity sake, viability defined would be how criminally active a group is? Would everyone agree with that?

WG, then points out a list of families with ranks that don't appear to be doing "anything."

Which would mean that viability isn't the end-all, and for that matter neither is Org/Op. These are different lens we can use to form the larger picture.

Gambino of LA, Iaccobacci of CL and D'Elia of Scranton fit within the confines of Org/Op. They were part of the organization regardless of what outsiders think of them. But in terms of criminal viability, no one is going to suggest they have more muscle or power than other ethnic or non-ethnic criminal organizations in the area. This matters because, stepping outside of our mafia-centric focus, it's beneficial to compare them to the larger world around.

But let's break it down and say that out of 300 Genovese members that 50 of them aren't engaged in any criminal activity. Would someone argue that the Genovese remains 84% viable?

But I would again state that these groups don't have an agenda to be the biggest and bestest criminal outfit in their areas. They have their own operations going on and there's overlap, but they don't set out to "conquer" things outside of their sphere. Gambino is just fine with his wine and water business ventures, if a Lucchese member moved to LA or anywhere, opened a restaurant and wanted bottled water for it, Gambinos would be an option. This is a network first and foremost. These guys are not joined solely for the purpose of crime, like say the cartels.

When a cartel member is no longer active in the operation, he's effectively out. When a mafia member is no longer active in an operation he's still a member in good standing. There's no criminal quota. That's org. But take this inactive member and put him alongside a Lombardozzi and yeah, the latter is likely going to have more influence, that's op.

This seems pretty clear.

[B.]

This thread is a rorschach test.

I have nothing but respect for Antimafia but his first post on an earlier page in this thread showed he was cynical toward the original post long before it veered into negative territory. He seemed to feel the point was redundant, that it's been discussed before, but if repeating yourself is a crime I should have a bullet in my head. The original post was not incendiary but meant to provoke constructive discussion whether someone agrees with the premise or not.

Angelo started this thread after he listened to a certain podcast episode but he didn't disrespect Scott in any way or accuse him of lying, just said he has a different POV and generally made points that go far outside anything he was addressing about Scott. Very different from attacking Scott's character like we saw in the Gangster Report thread.

A certain board member has a long history of hostile behavior, circular arguments, and claiming unsubstantiated theories are based on facts and evidence. Angelo told him he isn't interested in having those same discussions with him and the board member began insulting him not only here but in the Podcast section. Angelo did nothing to abuse his "mod powers", in fact he said the opposite -- that he wouldn't use his mod status, only that he wasn't interested in continuing the discussion. This same person has a history of this behavior and this was most evident in 2020 when he and another member attempted to lie about me because I disagreed with them and this resulted in a PM being sent to the entire board that revealed a flimsy "conspiracy" to undermine me and resulted in one of those members leaving the board on his own without being banned or coerced into it.

I take responsibility for bringing Wiseguy into this thread in a very provocative way and even if I disagree with his attitude I shouldn't have framed it that way as I do respect his mind. I'm often confused by Cabrini's perspective and he challenged something I posted but I'm a fan of him and enjoy joking around even if it involves disagreement.

Other than that, I find it bizarre that Antimafia views Angelo's posts the way he does and sees him abusing his mod status through his posts in this thread. It would be very unfortunate if he quits the board over this but I see him projecting many things onto this discussion that aren't there and he made it clear he was opposed to the original post from the beginning for whatever reason. The operational and organizational is a strangely controversial topic and some of us harp on it, others don't agree with it, and others take offense to the very idea.

Enough about that because there's plenty more to say that is on topic.

[InCamelot]

structure consisting of Top Boss, Senior Advisor, Boss, Underboss,

I think this info comes from a made member and this how the orders went down, something which corresponds with half of your "funny" statement. There was a governing board (top boss, boss, advisor and underboss (sometimes known as relay man) )and below them was the board of directors which also included a non-Ital.

Alex represented the south sidegroup, first ward and loop, Prio represented the north side group while Alderisio represented the west.



And yeah, Chicago was a little bit different, as I already said in my upper or last post to B. Im not saying they werent CN family and that they didnt operate under southern Italian rules, but still as you can see there was something different.

‐-------------

In my upper post I already asked B, but ill ask you too...do you have any file with at least few made guys using the terms operational vs organizational? Or is it just an educated guess?

He's describing operational, not organizational and the way its described doesn't come across like he's a member. An incarcerated boss maintaining contact with his acting on the street through his attorney and an informant describes how contact is maintained doesn't make this attorney part of the formal organization.

Org vs Op is a methodology to help better understand how these groups are structured and how they actually function. You will never hear it on wiretaps because it's an outsider rendition, one endorsed by DiLeonardo and others members when I explained the science behind it. To them it was "common knowledge" and my explaining it was like explaining the steps of putting on a shoe. People just put on shoes they don't think about it.

There is no such thing as "southern Italian rules." Southern Italy and Sicily, in terms of what we're discussing, were very different. But it doesn't matter because the Mafia comes from Sicily and the American phenomenon reflects that fully 100%. Groups like the Pittsburgh, Patriarcas or the Genovese had more mainlanders than Sicilians by the 1960's yet they still followed the Sicilian Mafia structure and system. It's easy, it works and it has withstood the test of time. 120-140 Mafia families in the world, there is not one single instance or evidence of a family adopting a different hierarchy or changing the rules to include non-member members. 100 screenshots of Italians including non-Italians in business decisions is not going to change this fact.

Respectfully, I can't keep going in circles with you. You are posting the same stuff that you did in the Chicago creation thread and the non-Ital thread that both Tony and Eric already struck it down. My doing it a third time is not going to change your perspective. If you want Chicago to have some weird hierarchy that includes non-member bosses then you are arguing that it's not a Mafia Family. Which goes against what the formal made members from LA to NY to Chicago itself have explained or articulated.

I don't know where else to go with you on this.

Damn, i knew that you were also going to break down. I was talking about official spots and i only asked you for evidence. Sorry for ruining your "Lets make Chicago completely Sicilian again" campaign. We disagree and pls stop answering my posts. I dont care if you are a mod or shit like that. Just ignore me.

Wanting context is going to take things back much further than this I know, but we should give context for what Angelo was responding to. He didn't come out of nowhere.

[B.]

What's funny is that this idea isn't controversial when it comes to most Families and locations. Many people interested in this would probably read these posts and say, "Yeah that's obvious." It is particularly controversial with Chicago and Canada, two areas that have far fewer member sources than other areas and as a result we generally have to theorize about them without knowing as much as we should or could. Naturally our theories are different which is fine if we all agree that we don't know everything and debate in good faith.

As more quality sources have been found on Chicago, it's apparent that previous theories are lacking and based on operational circumstances that don't necessarily inform what was going on organizationally. One member has a particular narrative he sticks to regardless and any discussion with him rests on the edge of hostility. He can go from adoring someone to attacking them in incredibly petty ways at the drop of a hat depending on how much they flatter his POV from post to post. Chicago discussions were productive and peaceful before he returned.

I believe Antimafia has a very open mind about Canada and is a gentleman, so I'm not accusing him of doing this, but in Ontario and Montreal there have been popular narratives that frame the mafia around its operational structure and when inside intel comes out it changes our POV. Some people however don't agree and that's fine but for many years I have seen Canada and Chicago as birds of a feather in that we lack clarifying details on the formalities there and people are passionate about their assumptions.

[B.]

Scott has said certain Detroit members had ranks that Angelo disagrees with and it's not that Scott's POV is entirely baseless, it's that he's referring to the operational power someone has. Whitey Besase is the best example, as Scott has said he was a captain and Angelo found evidence that Besase was a soldier with operational authority over Toledo. Angelo defends Scott when his character and credibility are attacked, he just happens to prioritize formal details which shouldn't be surprising considering one of his goals is to create accurate organizational charts of all US Families. He's also made operational charts and sees the value in representing these groups from both POVs (see his Cleveland charts earlier in this thread).

I believe Angelo started this thread in response to a podcast Scott did where he made some statements about Chicago which naturally intersect with other narratives about Chicago found on this board and elsewhere. Some board members have invested themselves emotionally into Chicago and treat these discussions like an extension of themselves and those discussions are inevitably unproductive at best and destructive at worst.

It's interesting what provokes people and what doesn't. Chin recently found info that Michael Mancuso may not have been the official acting boss and that goes against the belief many of us have had. Chin's findings show that Mancuso was operationally the one in charge on the street so you could say the distinction is academic but why then did they not give him the title? That's what makes org vs. op interesting to some of us, that there's usually a reason why the formalities are set up the way they are and they don't always reflect what's taking place on an operational or de facto level.

I'm sure I've posted before that Mancuso was the acting boss in the mid-2000s but I'm not married to the idea. When Chin posted that this might not be fully true, my response wasn't "Fuck you, Mancuso was the acting boss." It's actually more interesting that we might have to revise our understanding of the situation. Scott might have rolled his eyes about the Besase thing but I know he handles those sorts of interactions very well and knows Angelo's interest is sincere. It shouldn't be any different for Gus Alex or Vito Rizzuto.

[Angelo Santino]

Scott has said certain Detroit members had ranks that Angelo disagrees with and it's not that Scott's POV is entirely baseless, it's that he's referring to the operational power someone has. Whitey Besase is the best example, as Scott has said he was a captain and Angelo found evidence that Besase was a soldier with operational authority over Toledo. Angelo defends Scott when his character and credibility are attacked, he just happens to prioritize formal details which shouldn't be surprising considering one of his goals is to create accurate organizational charts of all US Families. He's also made operational charts and sees the value in representing these groups from both POVs (see his Cleveland charts earlier in this thread).

I believe Angelo started this thread in response to a podcast Scott did where he made some statements about Chicago which naturally intersect with other narratives about Chicago found on this board and elsewhere. Some board members have invested themselves emotionally into Chicago and treat these discussions like an extension of themselves and those discussions are inevitably unproductive at best and destructive at worst.

It's interesting what provokes people and what doesn't. Chin recently found info that Michael Mancuso may not have been the official acting boss and that goes against the belief many of us have had. Chin's findings show that Mancuso was operationally the one in charge on the street so you could say the distinction is academic but why then did they not give him the title? That's what makes org vs. op interesting to some of us, that there's usually a reason why the formalities are set up the way they are and they don't always reflect what's taking place on an operational or de facto level.

I'm sure I've posted before that Mancuso was the acting boss in the mid-2000s but I'm not married to the idea. When Chin posted that this might not be fully true, my response wasn't "Fuck you, Mancuso was the acting boss." It's actually more interesting that we might have to revise our understanding of the situation. Scott might have rolled his eyes about the Besase thing but I know he handles those sorts of interactions very well and knows Angelo's interest is sincere. It shouldn't be any different for Gus Alex or Vito Rizzuto.

I wasn't even thinking of Chicago when I started this thread, I make a point to avoid anything Chicago related for obvious reasons. Scott does the same thing with New York and other cities where he says so and so is "like a soldier" or "like a capo." He's trying to articulate someone's importance to a larger audience, I get why he does this. And it's his podcast, his articles, he's free to do as he wants.

My approach would be that rather than referring to an associate or soldier as "like a soldier/capo" I would instead articulate and try and drive home just how important an associate or soldier is, they are not grunts. Caramandi said it best, something along the lines of "one doesn't join the mafia, the mafia selects you. There are only 90 members of Philadelphia in the whole wide world, so to be selected for membership is a very big deal."

That's my take in this.

[B.]

Sorry -- I thought it was about Chicago since Scott made some comments on a show that relate to this.

Either way Scott's name was respectfully mentioned one time in your original post and Antimafia apparently felt this was a potential abuse of your mod status and akin to the Cammarano thread where numerous members called him a liar and piled on. What you said was "I love Scott but we do have very different perspectives on this stuff" which makes Antimafia's interpretation of your intention utterly bizarre, same with his belief that you are responsible for Villain's hostility, something that is common and habitual with him.

I hate to see Antimafia leave, but if "I love Scott but we do have very different perspectives on this stuff" followed by general discussion of op vs. org dynamics is seen as a thinly-veiled attempt to attack Scott he needs to rethink his own objectivity.

I'm also seeing that because several of us have a project together, us sharing views and defending one another in any way is seen as some kind of "Mob Archeologists" conspiracy. Villain obviously feels that way and Antimafia alluded to it in his post. A similar idea came up in the Cammarano thread, where we were accused of being part of some "research faction" trying to protect Scott (funny given you were accused of the opposite here) by stating that his articles were based on rumors that exist independent of him.

If people want to believe the four of us have an agenda in which we conspire to undermine people on the board who disagree with us, nothing I can say or do will change that and I will continue to act the way I act. We do have a sort of concensus about some topics but we also actively disagree about some things too and that's the way it should be. If someone looks at the ink blot and sees something else it makes me wonder if there's resentment and projection on their part but I'll take their POV into account if they express it sincerely.

I will be reporting this whole thead, as well as "The Mob Archeologists Podcast hosted by Antiliar, B, Tony and myself" thread, to Sol. In doing so, I might get clipped -- I see this almost as a foregone conclusion -- but being banned is a risk I'm willing to take.

Antimafia, do you sincerely believe it's a "foregone conclusion" that you would be banned for reporting these threads? Who has been banned for that reason or anything remotely similar?

I'm sorry you feel that way but it seems like there is a lot more going on with you that's informing your views on this. You're questioning Soliai's integrity, Angelo's integrity, and seemingly others without any concrete evidence of what you're saying.

[Angelo Santino]

Bah, if anyone of us does anything that the others find wrong or don't agree with, we wouldn't hold back calling each other out. In our phone calls we all, at one point or another, have had disagreements, some of them quite frustrating. Sometimes these disagreements go back and forth and get whittled down to things where parties have to just agree to disagree. There have been times where three of us have disagreed with a single individual. It happens, it's life, it's nothing personal.

As for as my being a mod here, my duties mainly involve removing spam and relocating posts. I barely "police" anyone on here and if anyone should have a problem it should be Pogo/Wiseguy who have had shots taken at them and I don't step in SC (from BB, may he rest in peace) style telling so and so "to take 30 days to think about it." And I don't have that power anyway, all bans go through Sol who investigates it himself, I'm not Sammy telling John so and so should go who then blindly signs off on it.

I'm a mod (org) but a poster (op) first, they go hand in hand but as a mod I have to remain above the fray so to speak. I never banned anyone or worked behind the scenes to ban anyone and I am not starting now, this includes what's going on now. Sol has made it quite clear that no one individual is bigger than this forum and that includes me. If he caught one instance of me or any other mod abusing the privilege he'd take me down faster than the Little Guy taking down Chuck and Larry.

Sorry for the mob comparisons.

[PolackTony]

Since my name was brought up, with what seems like an insinuation that I’m somehow involved in a possible conspiracy to attack board members (not trying to put words in anyone’s mouth, but this certainly seemed to have been the implication). I took some time away with from the forum due to personal obligations (like anyone else, I get busy sometimes).

I happened to have gained a bit of free time right when Jimmy Inendino died and local Chicago news broke the story that Inendino had been carried as a CI by the FBI in the 60/70s. After coming back on the forum to see what guys were saying, I checked out this thread, as it obviously covers a topic of discussion that is important to my own approach and framework for understanding the mafia, and made a couple of posts in attempt to elucidate some things that I thought were important. I haven’t engaged in any contentious exchanges in this thread and specifically have avoided responding to any of that. I’ve of course been reading the thread and like anyone else can see exactly who wrote what when; the last thing this thread needed was anyone else further adding fuel to the fire.

Needless to say, I’m more than capable of fighting my own battles if and when necessary and neither need nor solicit anyone to attack anyone else on my behalf, whether openly or clandestinely. Others whose names have been thrown out as connected to some presumed plot I’m sure would say the same for themselves.

I have nothing but respect for antimafia, but I don’t appreciate having my name thrown into some hypothesized conspiracy, or aspersions being cast on when I did and did not post on the forum as if my activities here are somehow suspicious or indicative of skulduggery.

[B.]

The only campaigning to have someone banned has been fraudulent accounts where someone is using multiple handles or deliberately spreading lies. I specifically told Soliai not to ban Confederate when he accidentally PMed the whole board about me because I believed he had done enough damage to himself. His opinion of me had no impact on how or why I use the board.

If anyone knows of a single case where someone was banned for disagreeing with a mod, having the wrong opinion, or... gasp... reporting threads let me know. People have been banned (sometimes temporarily) for habitually hostile behavior and deliberate lying. I'm opposed to censorship and most bans in general but I haven't seen any bans that were rooted in bias and if you believe that's going on you need to provide examples.