Re: [atlarge-discuss] Incorporation & Marginally Useful Insects

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

Joey and all stakeholders or other interested parties,

**star*walker** wrote:

>    Saturday, August 10, 2002 * 9:49 PM EDT USA
>
> [My responses are interwoven below.]
>
> At 08:42 PM 8/9/2002, Bruce Young wrote (in RE: [atlarge-discuss]
> ...the
> last several days' posts):
>
> >Joey wrote:
> >
> > >I've acquired exquisite perception, sensitivity, intuition,
> compassion
> > >and actual knowledge of-and-about a few things, people and
> "politics" chief
> > >among them.
> >
> >So, I take it, you don't buy the argument that "lawyer" is the larval
> stage
> >of "politician", which is an annoying yet marginally useful insect we
> are
> >all force to live with?  :)
>
> In spite of my setting out to become one, and still having affection
> for
> THE LAW, I have even greater disdain for the legal profession
> (parasitic
> monopoly) than your joke would suggest, which really set me to
> laughing.

  Some entering the legal profession do so with the long term goal
of becoming a politician.  It is one career path for Lawyers...

>
>
> I have equal disdain for the parasitic medical monopoly and the
> pharmaceutical monopoly to name but a few. The list is endless... of
> self-serving, government sanctioned and enforced, profiteering, high
> seas
> pirates! All of this is explained away as being for our own "good."
> Yeah,
> right!

  This seems a bit of an extreme point of view.  First the medical
community is by no means a monopoly.  Second the pharmaceutical
industry especially in the past few years, is no monopoly either as
new pharmaceutical companies have come along over the past
5 years that are quite good...  Inclone of course is not one of those
good ones...  >;)

>
>
> Were it left to me I would "de-regulate" every last one of them. If an
>
> Underwriter's Laboratory certification (non-governmental) is good
> enough to
> protect me from being killed by my own household appliances then I
> would
> regard their certification as good enough to protect me from being
> killed
> by my doctor, my lawyer and my Indian Chief (Native American, that is)
>
> without government dictating and telling me what is or is not a
> legitimate
> practice of those professions, and thereby creating MONOPOLY. I am
> then
> free to use UL certified professionals or not, and we'd truly have a
> free
> market.

  Interesting view and comparison.   Thankfully it(Your view) is not
widely shared...

>
>
> As it is now, we have too few doctors and nurses, way too many
> lawyers, and
> probably just about the right number of Indian Chiefs because we don't
>
> regulate those, at least not yet.
>
> Whereas "caveat emptor" (buyer beware) is a cherished legal principle,
> we
> are not supposed to apply it lawyers, judges and politicians. It would
> harm
> the social fabric we are told.
>
> ;-)
>
> >Seriously, we could use legal assistance to help make us a legal
> non-profit
> >agency!  Talk to Joanna!
>
> Any legal secretary can do that in less than a half-hour, and her boss
> will
> get to charge you big bucks for it. If she tries to offer the service
> directly at real-cost she will be arrested.
>
> I've incorporated at least three non-profit organizations and one
> for-profit (which could just as well have been non-profit ;-) ) in my
> life.
> That's very simple. Meet the letter-of-law requirements of a given
> jurisdiction.
>
> The hard part is writing a substantial charter, though a brief one is
> typically acceptable, laying out the organizations purposes that
> typically
> have more to do with taxation issues than anything.

  Very true here...

>
>
> The even harder part is writing the by-laws, unless you want to settle
> on
> the typical corporate (profit and non-profit) boiler plate that vests
> all
> authority in a board of directors.
>
> May I respectfully suggest given our international character and
> claims
> that we consider incorporating in The Hague. Unless there are
> extenuating
> circumstances requiring incorporation in the U.S.A. or elsewhere I
> think
> incorporation in the Hague or Geneva or would be emotively meaningful
> for
> an international organization.
>
> Other than for tax considerations, the place of incorporation is above
> all
> symbolic. Other than for a mailing address for resident agent to
> receive
> legal notices no one need actually be there.
>
> In this day and age we plan to operate it from all around the world,
> do we
> not?!
>
> > >Second, it is simply at the least bad form not to have published
> the
> > >complete panel vote with all candidates' names and panel member
> votes for
> > >each.
> >
> >I assume this comments on the selection of the Chair by the Panel
> members?
> >I agree that this would be useful info, but the selection of the
> chair was
> >the panel's duty & responsibility.  That said, why cloud the decision
> by
> >posting the vote data here, thereby causing members to thrash around
> about
> >it?  They chose, we need to accept their choice and move on.
>
> Yes, I wish I had been clear I was talking about the election of the
> "chair" by the panelists.
>
> And I wish you would meet me head on with regard to my statement later
> on
> in the same paragraph, the meat of it as far as I am concerned: "The
> way
> the results were announced, and still so far un-corrected, omitting
> the
> non-winning candidates' names and voters is in my conviction
> disrespectful
> and devaluing of those individuals."
>
> It is the simplest matter of fairness and justice and it troubles me
> that
> impartial others on this list (to the point of my catching up on my
> E-mails) have not spoken to this.
>
> The most useful way to look at any well-spirited honorable election is
> that
> there aren't winners and losers. Rather, someone is chosen and another
> is
> deferred (in a choice for one position). There ought not be any shame
> or
> hurt in that, instead pride in holding up for admiration, gratitude
> and
> recognition those willing to stand for service, regardless of the
> outcome.
> We all NEED affirmation regardless of circumstances and issues, and we
> need
> to gracefully and graciously give it to each other.
>
> Everything is fluid, nothing is permanent, everything is change, and
> today's chosen will be tomorrow's deferred or retired, and today's
> deferred
> will be tomorrow's chosen, if not retired.
>
> >Disclaimer: I nominated and voted for both Vittorio and Joanna (among
>
> >others), knowing that they have two very different visions for the At
> Large,
> >but knowing that both visions deserved representation on our panel.
> But even
> >if someone else had been chosen I would equally support them now,
> because
> >the Panel has the authority to choose and made their choice, and I
> have the
> >responsibility as a member to honor it!
>
> I see. You voted early... and often. ;-)
>
> > >Third, one of the burdens taken on by each of the new panelists,
> whether
> > >they are aware of it or not or whether they are comfortable with it
> or not
> > >or whether they like it or not, is to read every last post of every
> member
> > >to this list and respond to the merits of suggestions and proposals
> made in
> > >any such posts, however lame brained or "late to the party" they
> may think
> > >an offering is within the limits of this marvelous
> near-instantaneous
> >medium.
> >
> >Agreed.  In a flat organization like the one I hope we're building,
> everyone
> >in the membership has an advisory role that they need to take
> seriously.  If
> >they did, we might have fewer "flame wars" and more reasoned
> discourse here
> >(hint!)
>
> I am growing increasingly to see just the challenge in keeping up with
>
> reading the sheer volume of E-mail on this list. Right now I'm feeling
>
> overwhelmed, without even feeling the obliged to respond to things
> that
> aren't directed to me.
>
> I feel myself already behind in following up on my volunteering for a
> task
> group on verification and can much better understand the burden I
> asserted
> the panelists have. They are obviously going to need lots of help.
>
> Cheers!
>
> /s/ Joey
>
> Put your action where your... err... speech is! Create your personal
> volunteer profile at
> http://www.icannatlarge.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=19
> and tell everyone what you have done, and/or can do, and/or are
> willing to
> do -- NOW! :-)
> (Please at least book mark the above link.)
>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k 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: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
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