[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Members' rights



Joop the issue you raise is important but you must distinguish between such things
as rules and laws and Higher concepts that determine how those are implemented at
the will of the people.

Constitutions, By-Laws, Charters, and Articles (articles can be either) determine
how the lesser rules and laws are established.  So while we may have an ordinance
that is adopted by majority rule it may not infringe upon the rights established
for the individual by the higher laws protecting the individual from the majority.

I believe you rightly earlier pointed out that the vast majority of participants
were some type of domain name holder with a commercial bent.  This would be exactly
the reason for adopting rules to protect the minority individuals without such a
bent.  I have yet to see in this internet society that anything has been lopsided
in favor of the individual.  Maybe we should see how that would work. It worked
here pretty well in the US and pretty well in a few dozen other countries.
Sincerely,
Eric

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> On 08:39 p.m. 21/05/2002 +0300, Eray Ozkural said:
> >On Tuesday 21 May 2002 18:52, James Love wrote:
> > >
> > >     I oppose this provision for an at large. It has to be open to everyone,
> > > including those with unpopular views.  I don't want to be put in a
> > > possition to taking away voting rights from someone who disagrees with the
> > > group's leadership.  Let's nix this provision.     Jamie
> >
> >Agreed. Such vague provisions only serve to those who intend to take
> >advantage
> >of it to suppress the unpopular views, not those who heartily support an at
> >large organization.
>
> I only wish to start off the discussion on members' rights by suggesting a
> few broad meta-articles. The rest of the Charter must fill out the details.
>
> This is an important discussion to have on record, whatever the final
> charter formulation will be.
>
> This is not about "unpopular views". They are of course welcome and necessary.
> It is about actions, taken unilaterally and in defyance of the majority.
>
> Please think carefully about your natural knee-jerk reactions to protect
> every single individual member from "the tyranny of the majority".
> There is also your collective interest and the equally important
> consideration of protecting a very vulnerable fledgling on-line
> organization against deliberate sabotage.
> Don't be naive and trust that "it will not happen here".
>
> --Joop
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de