Ken, there is no missing hyphen or em dash on the name of the group listed as the sender of the campaign endorsement's return address label. 

Anyway, look carefully and you will note the mark in question is a tilde. Websters says:

Definition of tilde
1: a mark ˜ placed especially over the letter n (as in Spanish señor sir) to denote the sound \n?\ or over vowels (as in Portuguese irmã sister) to indicate nasality
2a: the mark used to indicate negation in logic and the geometric relation "is similar to" in mathematics
b: the mark used to indicate an approximate value

You, and at least one other individual, continue to ignore the name on the return address envelope. It is "OPA Get Involved." When recipients see "OPA" they might well believe the mailing is somehow supported by, endorsed by, or otherwise associated with the Ocean Pines Association. The use of "OPA" may not have been intentionally misleading but it certainly was not appropriate.

I suspect some would be outraged if I sent out letters endorsing candidates with a return address name of "OPA Forum."

Date of the origination of a Facebook group? That's really important. Now, I'll have to go back and check the start date on all the Facebook groups to which I belong. To what end, I don't know. It's probably something underhanded, though.

Some association voters might like to know a little about a Facebook group apparently sponsoring a campaign letter supporting two candidates at a cost of perhaps $4,000 or more. It certainly does not seem unreasonable to provide some info in that regard.

The return address of the mailing has the address of a candidate instead of some blind, anonymous Post Office Box? Gosh, that is mighty, what's the word, transparent.

Transparency would be the use of the return address of the person who owns or controls or manages the Facebook "Ocean Pines ~ Get Involved" page. I believe that is Esther Diller. How can anything less be transparent?

Is it transparent to not even let recipients know that the person who controls the Facebook page is the spouse of a candidate? I think reasonable people might see that as information that should have been provided.

It seems that two of the most recent legal battles the OPA Board spent money on - the referendum and Farr suits - could have been easily avoided if only the OPA Board had acted properly. Instead, they went their own way and spent thousands on legal actions that resulted in egg on the face of the Board and thousands spent.

That is a fair assessment. However, I would 100% agree that the board should not have refused to accept Trendic's petition for a spending limit referendum based on the language of the petition question. That decision was stupid. As for the Farr case, I believe the board acted properly initially but more or less went off the rails as the case dragged on, especially with regard to Daly's actions.

What I have a difficult time understanding is why some have this visceral dislike of certain board members. It goes beyond reason. In total, the board over the last few years, in cooperation with the GM, has produced great things for Ocean Pines. That is important. Important in a way that all these personal likes and dislikes of board members have little or no importance with regard to the impact of the quality of life here. I suspect 90% of association members could not name the seven current board members if their life depended on it. 50% or so don't even vote.

Finally, why shouldn't candidates, either severally or together, campaign for the offices they want? Why shouldn't they spend as much money as they want? Are they collecting money from seedy, anonymous donors with "dark money"? 

I don't believe I wrote anything remotely suggesting that candidates should not spend money if they choose, or not to accept donations to do so. The mailing in question was not purported to come from the two candidates. It was said to come from some Facebook group. 

Regardless of who is elected in August, we can only hope that there is as much or more Board success with what really matters to the vast majority of association members as we have seen in the last couple of years