302: MemberVetting Dangerous and Destructive Behaviors

Hey everyone, welcome back to Private Club Radio where we go over, discuss anything and everything private club related private club, country club, city club, golf club, yacht club, all the clubs. Whether you're a club professional or brand new to the industry or just interested, welcome to the show. My name is Denny Corby, I'm your host and welcome to this episode of Member Voting. Thanks to our friends Kenes Member Voting, we have Paul Dank on with us and on this episode of this series we are going to talk about dangerous and destructive behaviors. Last one we talked about lies and misrepresentations what people put in or do not put in to their applications, which is very fascinating. This one is all about the behaviors that can come with bringing in some not great fits for our clubs. There are so many good nuggets in this episode, as well as aha moments. One of my biggest takeaways was that clubs will spend more time vetting employees than we will members. What More time, resources, money, angle more in depth to researching the employees and the members. That is wild, but we are talking about dangerous and destructive behaviors. What is a dangerous or destructive behavior? What are some of the most common dangerous behaviors? How to differentiate if it's something from a one-time mistake or something that's a pattern that is dangerous, as well as modern tech, how social media plays into all of this. It's a fun episode. Please welcome from Kenes member vetting our good friend Paul Dank. Have any good plans for the giving of thanks?

Well, we're hosting circus, so you know lots of cooking and pandering to loved ones. How many deep are you rolling? You know that's a day by day. We have, we have loose commitments with many.

Sounds like our family. Sounds like our family. Last time we talked it was all about lies and misrepresentations and this time we're going to be talking about dangerous and destructive behaviors. So, pretty much, if you know, people get through the vetting process and then you know what and they get to the club like what is a dangerous or destructive behavior when it comes to the member vetting and when?

they get into the club Dangerous. I think you can define that about a number of ways, and we don't have to go to the narrative of someone who's going to shoot someone or stab someone, right. But you still have a wide variety of behaviors that go far beyond being unacceptable and to the point that they are potentially criminal, or behaviors that are leading up to something that's going to be very, very dangerous or harmful for someone else, right? And so you want to sort of look at the club world as a microcosm of society. If you look at the US population you have depending on which, which metrics you want to use you've got at least 13% of the public that use recreational drugs within the last 30 days. You've got 6.5% of the public who are fighting alcohol addiction at any time You've got and these are really wild numbers, depending on which studies you look at, and they're all from very credible sources you have somewhere between 21 and 42% of all adults who have what would be a diagnosable mental health condition. Of them, 55% of you pick which number are undiagnosed, so they're just living with whatever. This is Now, that's a very alarming number and it can mean a number of things. It can mean things like someone who's suffering from depression as opposed to someone who's becoming manic, right, but that's still a very big percentage of society and when it comes to things like even recreational drug use, alcohol abuse, the top tier of society isn't insulated from this. As an investigator, I deal with and see this all the time and this can be a component. So, simply because someone has money and the average club member says you know, we're a pretty sedate group who wants to join a club and we all behave pretty calmly and rationally, we don't. I can't see where somebody who you know, who might have some propensity toward doing something inappropriate or something violent, you know what, would have any interest in the club. That's not really how it works If you think about it. There's a lot of people that want to join clubs because clubs give them credibility and prestige. So they may not share your value system, but they want to be known as associating with the club, they want to be part of that environment, and those people are still potentially prone to have problems. So the good news is, a lot of clubs haven't had a problem. The bad news is, if you get on Google and you start searching for things like the term country club sexual assault. You're going to stop looking at 20 or 30 pages of news reports about some horrific incident that happened at a club that involves a member or a member and a guest, or, you know, a member and someone on the staff, and so and these are these are isolated incidents where this is some club in a flaky community where the people are strange, and I could see that happening. Right, this happens across the spectrum. A lot of clubs believe that they're insulated from it and simply it's a number scheme. It's going to happen. I'm glad it hasn't happened yet but you can do something to try and identify those behaviors early and prevent it.

I was going to say I'm sure if a club or somebody wants to get a little even more scared, I'm sure if they just type in you know country club, private club, sexual assault, and then either their state or maybe like their area or region, you know again the club rules and micro houses. Society has broken people in it.

Club members aren't bad, but there are people who, unfortunately, you know, look at something like an active shooter situation that you'll see on the noobs. What's the first thing the media does? They start pulling the person's background apart and they start seeing escalating levels of problems. The same kind of behaviors can often be found by goodness through getting a member, and so if you see someone who's doing things and you say you know, I really can't put a context in which that would make sense and that would be a reasonable course of action that a normal person engage in, well then maybe this is something that's going to repeat itself at your club. That's the whole point of due diligence, right, we try and identify things that are going to be problematic before they happen, before we engage, and you know this really should be the case when it comes to members, I mean, most clubs are doing more to vet the dishwashers and the valets than they are becoming members. It's just the reality. It just hasn't taken root and become as well deployed as it should be. Sure, if you think about the average club, many of them are doing employee screening, can you?

say that one more time, one more time One more time.

Very small. You're allowed to look at a very small number of data points and there's a lot of. There's great federal and state laws that protect employees from abusive employers, right or discriminatory employers. Even that little background check is more than most clubs are doing when it comes to their own members. Now they all have the nomination process, which is great, but it's very limited and most of the nominations are done by people who were nice to me in the past or I've always known them to be nice, but I don't really know, them. I'm vouching for them, but I really can't and I'm never going to get in any trouble anyway, if they turn out to be a terrible member. I didn't know. I thought the guy was nicer, I thought she was nice, so I nominated. So the nomination process is important but it's really not. It's really not full of facts, it's subjective and in place. Screening and clubs is probably doing more to protect the members than anything that they're doing on their average member vetting platform. Wow.

That was it. That was that like hits home. You're like, oh my goodness, like when you just said that that is, that's the golden nugget. Right, there Is there. So there's two things I have One is are there like, is there a common I don't want to say common, dangerous behavior, but, like A, is there just something that happens that's more common than than others? And then the other part is well, in terms of the things that we see in the Kettis background let's start with that one we think are yeah.

So, is there like?

a like, a most common like behavior that you come across during the actually like yeah, so is there. Is there something more like something that you come across during the vetting process that you know? You know because you've you've all been doing it for so long, you know. Do you recognize the patterns? Are there patterns?

Well, there certainly can be. So. So my my example about in, when there's an active shooter in, the media looks and they start to see all of these different behaviors that are trending toward the extreme and end up leading to mass violence. Right, when you see those kinds of things and you look at what the media is looking for, there we're looking for the same sorts of things. I'm not going to tell you that Kettis can determine whether somebody is actually going to lose it and they're going to lose it in 2025, and they're going to hurt somebody, but what I can tell you is that there there are indicators in sight that they're engaging in behaviors where they don't really have a good and it would seem to be too extreme. So I'm going to, I'm going to pose something to you. You have crazy numbers of people that are involved, believe it or not, in domestic violence. The number is 25 plus percent of adults have engaged in some form of domestic violence in their lifetime. It doesn't mean they did it yesterday. Maybe they did it 40 years ago. And it means and you define domestic violence. It means a lot of things. It can mean something like stalking after a relationship. It can mean physical violence. It can mean emotional violence, economic violence. Oh, it's a staggering number. Here's the even crazier part which surprised me and surprised my team Women are more likely to be guilty of it than men. Women will strike their partners or do things to harm and harass their partners, and it all falls under that blanket of domestic violence. That's certainly something that economics doesn't keep away. When you think of straight violence, there's a socio economic component to it. Right, it's almost pyramid shape. The people that join clubs come from the top tier of society. They realize early on behaviors that are acceptable and behaviors that aren't. People that are from disenfranchised communities with lower education, lower economic opportunities are more prone to get involved in it. That doesn't mean that the top strata is left without participation. It still happens. There are still people that engage in those behavior and they think they can. At the extreme, look at a Jeffrey Epstein. I have absurd amounts of money and I can engage in any kind of behavior I want and, by the way, I'm going to find a whole bunch of people that approve of that behavior and like to join me. Obviously that is the extreme. But you have people at every club who, I can guarantee, are involved in drug use, who are involved in unfortunately, criminal activity, who are involved in domestic violence, who don't have a filter and don't follow the rules. So when can is can find some behavior that's predictive, that's got real value? Clubs get to remember, they get to set the standard of what's acceptable. Context matters, certainly, and there are times when a behavior that seems completely unacceptable is acceptable, and there's a lot of times where it's not, and it really doesn't matter what the explanation is. And I'll give you an example. Can you think of a time when it's okay for me to drive my car into another car in tension? No, okay. So under most circumstances, no. But what if the only way that I could keep your car from hitting a child was for me to knock your car off course with my car? Well, that would be an explanation. So context does matter. The same question when is it okay to beat your wife up? I don't think there's a yes to it. I don't know that it's debatable. I think it's reflective of your character. I think if you're willing to do that, you're probably willing to do a lot of other things and maybe, just at the minimum, does it make sense for a club to watch you there and to figure out where it's going to go and whether you're really well behaved outside of your home environment. Is that what the other members would really want to say? Well, you know, it's just battery against the wife. I mean, what happens behind closed doors? There could be an explanation. I can't speak for every club, but when you see those kinds of behaviors, you have an option to say right now isn't the right time for you to participate in our club. And remember, clubs should be exclusive. If they're unwilling to look at the truth about potentially predictive behaviors, then they should just say you know there isn't betting, they don't need me, they don't need companies like mine. Does the person have a check that clears? And that's okay if that's the standard, but there are a lot of clubs that that's not acceptable and they don't want to associate with this. And when you have an opportunity to see some facts that are just laying around that support this isn't the right time for this member or this person to become a member. It sort of makes sense to do it and I think if you ask the membership at the vast majority of clubs, would you like to be insulated from these kinds of people? Even if they were nominated by somebody nice, the answer would overwhelmingly be yeah.

You also brought up our next episode, which is going to be all about decorum and bad fit. But when it comes to these, you know sequences and patterns and different things. How do you differentiate and how can you tell the difference between like a one-off and, besides the obvious, like? Well, obviously, if you just see it like a one-off, are there different other clues and triggers that can separate the one-off from a pattern?

Well, well, certainly not. Everybody is going to have a pattern that's going to demonstrate who they're going to become. And you know, you can certainly have an event. Remember, we can only find the information on waiting to be found. Clubs are not engaging us to go and do things like government clearance, background checks, where we're interviewing friends and family of polygraphing people. That's not the intent. The intent of fact-based member betting is to say we took the time and did the due diligence to look for anything. That number one, the applicant left out but a bearing on our decision of whether to let you in or not. And number two, did they lie to us? Did they mislead us in any way to try and get into the club? That's really the spirit of this. But if you see some behavior and say I really can't think of a context where this behavior would make any sense and it's completely inappropriate, at a minimum, and potentially action-right, sibling-crimitally if it were to happen again, it's kind of a no-brainer. So there isn't always a pattern, but there are other times that there are patterns, when I see pleadings and litigation that talk about conduct that's inappropriate, right, and then I see police run that person's home on multiple occasions and then I see the drunk driving in there and maybe I see old, not employment-eligible criminal behavior but criminal behavior from the past. When I see all of those things it sends a red flag. Clubs do have the burden that they want to right. So a club might see that there's someone who has misdemeanors from the past and that may not mean anything to them and they'll say it's been too long and those weren't important to us in our decision-making. The next club might see that and say we just know this. They were an adult, they were able to take an act for themselves. We did someone with that kind of background as an appropriate fit here and set their own standard. So again, we find the information, we present it to the clubs and then they have to decide whether or not it has meaning. At a minimum they know about it, because what's going to happen is other people are going to know about it and find out All the members and the spouses on the internet, google. You know they'll do their 10,000 hours of research on a new club member. They don't like to try and find all the bad things and have something to gossip about. So management in the club should not be the last group to figure out that they'll add a member in who's got a checkered past.

When it comes like so, with that checkered past and you know someone who may have had some issues whatever in the past have you found or seen a gap that I don't want to say is acceptable, because that's also a very, very like loose term, but have you seen, like okay, more than like five years or 10 years, that there was nothing bad that happened? There was no, you know whatever. Is there a certain gap that you can almost a little bit not securely go I'm trying to be cautious of my words, I know it's all relative now Like, is there a gap that you can be like okay, I think it's a little safe to say, or, you know, there probably is a change and we shouldn't worry.

Well, I'm going to say I think that comes down to really criteria that the club wants to set, how exclusive that club is and who the fellow members are. They have to sort of determine what they think is appropriate and when something matters and should be a no, as opposed to when it's a conversation to say we're aware of, and obviously something like that can't repeat itself. I've seen that happen at clubs and then I've seen clubs who have said yeah, we've actually talked about it and we don't think that this is contributory to the decision. So we're aware of it and we're moving on.

We're in 23. I know we talked about it in one of our episodes. I'm sure it's going to come up in all of them. Technology there's a lot, I know. In our last episode you mentioned, you know, facial recognition software and that just got me going down a rabbit hole of I'm dying to know for myself and I'm afraid to ask you and I'm afraid to even bring it up in front of you, but I'm so nervous that what? Where my face would pop up? No, I trust me, I've seen and it's not good. So, when it comes to like what, how does technology play a role in all this? And then I'm sure a whole other episode could be just on social media in general but like, how do tech and social media come into play with all of this? Now, Sure, Well.

So social media is a monstrous portion of what we look at. Our investigation on the internet is not Googling, they call it OSINT, it's open source intelligence gathering. It's kind of a fancy term. It was tradecraft, you know, 20 years ago for spy agencies and law enforcement. It's now grown to let's look for anything that's available to be found that somehow helps and somehow provides information, and that's really the basis for what Kennis does. So we look at a lot of types of records. But the online world there's so much data out there. Part of the reason why Kennis even exists is because we have this neat intersection of technology in an open society that we've never had before. So there have never been more people posting more information, more organizations and entities posting more information about individuals in the United States than ever before. The younger folks are that are joining clubs, the more prone they are to have a massive history right. And then when you look at that and you understand that often things that I could find with Google that have gone away, they've gone so far down the rabbit hole and they've aged and I can't see them anymore. It doesn't mean that guys like me can't see them and that we have different tools to look for that. Google is just a search engine and it indexes less than 5% of the information that's out there. That means 95% of it's waiting around Now. Does that mean it doesn't mean we're going to find interesting things about everybody, because there are a lot of people who are very forward about who they are and honest about who they are, and everything that we find supports the narrative of who they are. But technology has now put us in a position where there's this vast reservoir of information and then when you take the information, you stop being linear about it. So instead of looking for information just about Denny, I began looking at your sphere, that people around you, and I try and identify information that they may have posted, that you didn't directly post and you may not have was out there. The facial recognition tools that we use find exactly that. In fact, dan, one of our executive management team, used himself as the guinea pig when we went to an updated product and we really liked this tool and Dan looked and he said, oh my gosh, there's a whole bunch of pictures. I had no idea he was even taking these pictures. They were at church events and they were at school events. He's not tagged in there, his name isn't included anywhere on there, but there he is and there's his family with him and they're geo-targeted in so we know exactly physically where he was and what time of day it was. So there's a lot of this kind of information that's coming out. That's allowing us to look at the sphere and find new information, but information that's contributory, right? So I'll give you an example. We're talking about dangerous behaviors. We had an exclusive club in Florida. They get a lot of people to come from other places to Florida and then try and join the club. There's an instance where the applicant member was not named at all, but he has an adult child, no, maybe a late teen child who was in high school. Well, we looked in that teen's sphere for any information about dad and dad's name doesn't come up. But there were posts about Abby's dad and there were a number of them about apparently he came home, the girl had had people over and there was a boy who allegedly brought the beer to the party. Well, dad apparently grabbed the kid and threw him into the wall repeatedly and said he would beat him to death. Now, let's look at that. Oh, what kind of a behavior is that I mean under what circumstances. I understand I'm a dad and I'm a protective. I also understand you don't put your hands on children, especially not when anybody is in immediate danger. That's what we have law enforcement for. You can call the parents if you don't want to go that route, but you don't put your hands on a child, let alone throw them into the wall. Now here's the interesting thing. The kid took the abuse. No one called the police. There's no record of this. But through our search of looking to see if we could find any nexus within that sphere to that individual, well, we found Abby's dad. No one's doing a background check on Abby's dad, but we knew where to look and we knew who Abby's dad was, the subject of the investigation. So we're really at a unique intersection, and the great thing from our aspect is, even though privacy is constantly changing and being upgraded at all of these different internet participants, as quickly as that's happening, new tools are being developed to find things that are open and unprotected, and there's a lot of it out there, so I don't see this getting any less contributory. I think there's always going to be more data every year because more and more people are putting their entire lives online. And then the goofy people are proceeding to set up ghost accounts to troll people and to engage in terrifying behavior, and that they do it anonymously, right, because they have to maintain their social status. It would be uncool to come out. This is the kind of idiot I am, so I'm going to do it under some anonymous accounts. Well, guys like me, find those anonymous accounts, connect the dots so you can see who the person really is.

Those YouTube comments, user 583642.

That's right.

Can you can. So this is it's a two-part question what? And actually it's just two different questions, never mind. One is how do you differ? So not all of your levels of packages go that deep, correct? Like people can kind of sort of pick and choose how far down the rabbit hole it should go. Because I just want, I still want people to think like, oh, every time that they look at somebody, they come back with all of this information so they can almost choose how far down the hole. I'm assuming, yeah, that they want to go and get information so I talked about the sphere around a person.

Really that determines the package. So we set one that's based on let's look at just information in the applicant's sphere. We have another package where we say it makes sense to add the partner or spouse because, even though there's going to be a lot of cross out, going to be unique information and that's probably going to be the sweet spot for most clubs, as you get to be a more exclusive club, things like how your business interests behave and what your business interests are matters. They want to see that if, instead of you're a slumlord and your properties are constantly, you know, a source of fines and you're in the in the media, the company is in the meat or how badly it treats the tenants, the person that you want at the club, you know. I think the last time we talked I talked about there was somebody who was in the transportation business, but as we looked into his sphere it turns out that he's a repo man and he's very, very happy to post videos anonymously about his interaction with the people whose car crew are taking away. I don't know that repo man screams country club material, especially not one who makes one of the people whose cars. He makes a living off of repossessing. So you know, not necessarily dangerous behavior, but certainly wasn't disclosing that that's what he did in the transportation, yeah.

I can just see how you can go down that rabbit hole of you know conflicts of interest. If he has to tow a member's car, like how does that work? He ends up on YouTube. I'll pull it around back from hookup but, but actually probably not, because the valet is way more vetted than them, so he knows a lot better. Can, can, can and do clubs periodically vet or sort of keep tabs. I shouldn't say keep down, I don't know if that's the proper word, but you know how can that happen? Does it happen? you mean continued backgrounds into existing members or like you know is it can that happen? Does it happen like, let's just say, an incident does occur or something does pop up in the media about us, somebody, and then it's like, oh, we should maybe do a little bit more research on this person 100%.

Those are fewer and more infrequent. I think a lot of times if there's something going on person, you know, isn't some kind of financial peril, they end up leaving the club anyway. If someone does violate some club policy, a lot of times their membership is terminated on the spot. But there are times when a rumor will spread and there will be enough veracity to it that they will contact a company like ours and say can you see if there's any, any evidence out there that that talks about this? I will say that also. I think a lot of times when those incidents arise they go to their council first and foremost and the lawyers want to be helpful. So the lawyers may engage somebody to to work on that. But yeah, absolutely. I mean clubs, clubs are allowed to set those standard. There are some clubs that are hostage to their own bylaws and if they don't have a mechanism to say we could just decide that it's it's the right time to remove a member and they don't have a lot, of a lot of rules, they can act quickly. But some clubs are stuck where they say unless we will problem at the club itself. That falls under one of these categories. You know, they don't remove members. They just let it play out, which is which is unfortunate because it leads to a lot of unnecessary drama within the club. A lot of members get upset, especially if it's something that's being aired publicly about this person and you know they don't want to be associated with that person anymore. That's really what your club is. It's an it's associated. So, yes, long answer those. Those investigations do come up, but it's it's you and far between. Most of the time they just deal with them quietly and internally.

When it comes to doing all of this. Are there any? I don't know if it's year end, there end are there any like data and privacy issues that could come up or any sort of thing? Because, like to me, in my head, I'm like, oh, you know, I would assume to be like, oh, they're violating my data and privacy because of X, y and Z. But you know, just going back to what you've told me, it is all open source but still, I know, you know every town and things could well, but like, does that come into play really or not really?

Well, from Kenneth's standpoint, no, simply because we only look in help. So we're not. We don't have a contact at the IRS to tell us what's going on. You know, we don't call your pharmacy to find out what prescriptions you're getting. We don't engage in anything like that. But there are instances where clubs will do things like they will call another club and ask for information on that person, who happens to be a member of another club on the download Right, and that's potentially dangerous. You're asking somebody else to you know, help you in making a decision. Here's you could be hanging on something that you shouldn't be relying on. There are times this is one where you know there wasn't an investigative angle, there was nothing for us to do, but the conversation was we have, we have people that are reporting that a member has HIV and this member is around and in the locker rooms and in the facilities and everyone's a stir and doesn't want the person around. There isn't an investigatable angle to that and that's the kind of thing where the club is really on potentially precarious grounds. If they take action on a rumor and I don't know that, they can bring up your health and safely say we think you're a health risk today and you weren't yesterday and we're basing that on Innuendo and somebody else's speculation. You know clubs give those, but those kinds of situations are rising naturally anyway. They really don't have anything to do with the applicants that are part of, you know, part of membership. I mean, really, before you let somebody in, you get one shot at taking a look at fact-checking and verifying that there's nothing that's been left out of the conversation, once they're in the club there are new twists and turns that can be headaches for membership. But no, in terms of accessing information we don't have any special power. We don't look in any special places. If something is meant to be protected, the club would be very remiss in hiring any provider that would say we're going to look into those kinds of things that we probably shouldn't be. To give you the extra secret background check.

Are there any more challenges? That sort of sounds like. You know, I don't want to say a challenge in, I don't want to say detecting, but you know what challenges sort of come up when it comes to detecting some of these behaviors, because it's not all easy peasy and fun and games.

Well, I think context can sometimes be a problem, right? So we had weeks back about Twitter posts that named a prospective member's spouse and they were very derogatory, and so the client called back and said is there any more context that you can give us? Right? What do we know about this person? What we know is somebody set up a Twitter account, said really inflammatory, awful things. Twitter hadn't taken them. Do we start again on that one?

Yeah, just keep, just like go back a couple of seconds. Yeah, you restart, and then all that Twitter accounts set up.

These inflammatory things were sad Twitter had not taken them down as of the time that we located them, and so how credible is that source? Right? That was a challenge for the client. These are completely terrible allegations. There doesn't seem to be any basis for these anywhere else. Could somebody have a detractor? Sure, that's a lot different than us seeing things that are in, maybe, pleadings in a court case, right? Or a Twitter profile where that Twitter poster is open and obvious who they are and what the relationship is, and you can connect the context to it and say, oh, this is somebody who actually knows this person very well, but in anonymous Twitter account it was only put up to say these awful things. So once in a while you get those things where it's a little bit difficult to say. Does this have any meaning In that case? I don't think the club. I don't know what their decision was, but I don't think the club had any basis to do anything other than have a conversation about it. Are you aware of these posts and is there something more to this? Because it would be terribly distasteful if the club finds out later on some veracity to this nonsense and give that applicant an opportunity to talk about it. Do I think it's good that that was out there? Nope, do I think it's normal? Do I think normal people nor have anonymous detractors who say terrible things about them? No, you were probably involved in something that made somebody angry enough to do that, but those are few and far between, fortunately. But bear in mind, denny, with something like that, that could just as easily have been brought up by a member during the vetting process and said I do know that there's somebody who said these things about this applicant Doesn't necessarily because it came from your member vetting partner, kenneth, it doesn't necessarily mean that you wouldn't see that and have that same challenge and that same information to deal with.

And because you brought that up, you can then see how they would react once you bring it up to them. And then you can just tell like, oh, they seemed a little suspicious or they seemed nervous when I brought that up. So yeah, it's just having that conversation and if someone's like, oh, my goodness, we have this crazy person.

You could take it one step further during that conversation they might provide for you and it's like, oh, ok, I can kind of put those and then you can call us back and say we have a new data point regarding this. It turns out she says it's this person. Can you find anything about this person? Absolutely, we get after it. So context helps a lot and they decide they want to have those conversations and again, those kinds of more controversial judgment calls about the veracity of the information are usually very few and far between and, like I said, I think that they get generated naturally. It's not something that's indicative of using someone to help with your fact based vetting or not.

And speaking of conversations, if someone wants to have a conversation, learn more about Kenneth's gamber vetting you. Answer all your questions.

We can spend as much time getting into the nitty gritty as you want. Another avenue is for folks who work at a club that based with NCA. We're putting on our second training for CA and we're going to get into a little bit of the nitty gritty of the legalities of member vetting and I think that as well Tanzer, a NCA board member and very accomplished expert attorney in the space, is going to be co-presenting with me. So if you're a member, get a seat at that webcast and check it out, because I think we're going to try and really make it as impactful and helpful for clubs so that they understand what they can do and then what they might make sure that they refrain from doing during this process. It's not real complicated, but it's really great to hear an accomplished, expert attorney's opinion on oh, it was funny earlier when we were talking about finding out stuff about people.

I just started laughing, because gangs must do the complete opposite. You can have a niche for gangs because a gang can contact you and go hey, we're looking at Phil Jones, and if you come back with not enough bad stuff, then it's like I don't think they're a good fit for your gang. They have nothing about them.

They got tickets for a later thing. Maybe they're under something. We're going to have to take a look at the gang and see if they want some help with their vetting.

Are you getting some weaklings coming through? Are you getting people with not enough teardrop tattoos? Give us a call. We're going to see if they're fake. I think she would like to add that we could put a lot of work into it. Hope you all enjoyed that episode. As you heard, if you are interested in learning more about Kenes and member vetting and how to take yours to the next level, head on over to membervettingcom. Paul's also over on LinkedIn. Go and connect with him there. Once again, if you enjoyed this episode and found it valuable, or know someone who might find it valuable, please pass it along. As always, your support is greatly appreciated. A like, share, subscribe, follow, rating it all helps. Until next time, catch you on the flippity flip Hashtag. Epstein Didn't Kill Himself.