[atlarge-discuss] Hatred and Outreach

[eric@hi-tek.com]

Whoa Bro,

Hatred is harmful and contageous.
Please look at the fingers pointed at you when you point one in anger.
I cannot know your life but can feel your pain and hatred when you write.

Hating all in the legal profession and all in the medical profession is a little
troublesome.
Please limit your hatred to a few that you know, lest some be justified in hating
everyone like you, because of your actions.

This path should not be followed and not tolerated by our civilized group.
I do not know this person who calls themself starwalker
but I can register hate mail when i see it.
Be careful here folks.

eric

**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.
>
> 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!
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.)


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