Re: [atlarge-discuss] Members' rights

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

Eric and all stakeholders or interested parties,

  Good points here Eric and very simply but nicely put as well
I will make it even simpler.  We The Stakeholders/users have
certain inalienable rights.  Amongst these are:  ect., ect., ect...

eric@hi-tek.com wrote:

> 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

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