Re: [atlarge-discuss] Members' rights

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Joop and all stakeholders or interested parties,

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.

  I didn't see anything in your original post on this thread regarding
members rights at all.  I still don't.  Could you please point them out
Joop?  What I do see is some ideas/comments as to what members
will be restricted in doing or expressing...  That I find to be
yet another  form of CENSORSHIP.  And that is fundamentally
WRONG...

>
>
> 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.

  What actions are you referring to specifically Joop?  Please
outline the Actions that you have in mind...

>
>
> Please think carefully about your natural knee-jerk reactions to protect
> every single individual member from "the tyranny of the majority".

  In the US we have found that from time to time the minority
needs and deserves some protection.  As I have read this has
also been true in New Zealand as well with the Native New Zealanders...
So to restrict actions from members that are not specifically
and tangibly destructive is far and away unreasonable...

>
> There is also your collective interest and the equally important
> consideration of protecting a very vulnerable fledgling on-line
> organization against deliberate sabotage.

  Yes there is, this is true.  But not at the expense of opposing
views/ideas/comments/observations of individual members...

>
> Don't be naive and trust that "it will not happen here".

  What will happen here??  What is "it"??

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

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



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