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

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Panel Mandate options



It's a DoS-based censorship of the other party's speech, plain and
simple.
-s

On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 22:06, Jeff Williams wrote:
> Stephen and all,
> 
>   Interesting tact.  Unfortunately it is incorrectly applied.  A
> Filibuster is quite opposite of your attributation Stephen.
> In fact a filibuster is a celebration of speech in contention
> to a particular position held by a potential opposition.
> 
> Stephen Waters wrote:
> 
> > Having structured discussion on a working list with specific, known
> > rules is not censorship anymore than a chair calling a meeting to order
> > when two parties get wildly off-topic or speak at length to the
> > detriment of others. Jeff Williams' definition of any repression of
> > speech as "censorship" is not the standard definition. I doubt the U.S.
> > Senate opposition considers it censorship when the effective DoS of a
> > filibuster is in progress... and a filibuster is most certainly a
> > repression of speech.
> >
> > -s
> >
> > On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 15:57, Jeff Williams wrote:
> > > Judyth and all,
> > >
> > >   I am in agreement with Judyth's comments/remarks below.  I am
> > > also puzzled that Judyth on the one hand supports publicly
> > > CENSORSHIP, yet on the other says that members are members
> > > and have a right to vote and that we have a duty to notify the members
> > > of upcoming votes/polls.  To me these two positions are juxtaposed,
> > > and therefore inconsistent.  As such, I again state clearly and without
> > > reservation that I do not support Judyth as a watchdog for any
> > > election unless or until a recant of the CENSORSHIP position
> > > from Judyth is made publicaly.
> > >
> > >   I humbely and kindly await such a  recant...
> > >
> > > espresso@e-scape.net wrote:
> > >
> > > > At 16:44 +1300 2003/02/28, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> > > > >...
> > > > >However the members list is not the exact voters' list. There are up
> > > > >to 25
> > > > >addresses that bounce, so these people cannot be considered "voters".
> > > > >There
> > > > >is also the matter of the 169 "no messages please" members, who I will
> > > > >include only after they opt-in. They have 3 days to do this and one
> > > > >day has
> > > > >passed. So far 16 have opted in.
> > > > >
> > > > >This process will result in a final voters' list (for this Poll!)
> > > > >that I
> > > > >will send to the watchers.
> > > > >
> > > > >You have expressed reservations about such an opt-in and if Jan wants
> > > > >me to
> > > > >use the full list too, this would put me under pressure to do as you
> > > > >wish.
> > > > >Shared responsibility.  Walt is O.K. with the opt-in.
> > > > >
> > > > >But I must say that such a decision goes a  beyond mere watching.
> > > >
> > > > This puzzles me a bit.
> > > >
> > > > For one thing, within any group or organization I've ever
> > > > dealt with, members are members and they have the *right* to vote.
> > > >
> > > > Telling them when and where they can exercise that right isn't spam
> > > > --it's the *duty* of the organization to tell them. Of course,
> > > > a member can choose not to exercise the right, but it's not for
> > > > us to say that because they chose not to get a mailing list or
> > > > announcements of meetings of other organizations taking place in
> > > > other countries, they should be disenfranchised.
> > > >
> > > > "Bounces" are a different matter. An organization can only
> > > > use the contact information it was given by the member. It
> > > > can't do anything about the members whose mailboxes are
> > > > full or changed ISPs without notifying it. Bylaws, like laws,
> > > > usually contain something to the effect that notices sent
> > > > to the last address provided by the person will be
> > > > considered to have been delivered. All we can really do
> > > > about making sure people tell us about address changes is
> > > > to make sure there's a reminder on the Web site and maybe
> > > > a form for the purpose.
> > > >
> > > > For another, I don't really understand why it puts pressure
> > > > on you or goes beyond a scrutineer's role to suggest that
> > > > all members should be sent a notice, while your personal
> > > > decision to send an opt-in message to the 169 on behalf
> > > > of the group (which wasn't asked to approve this decision)
> > > > should be seen as more legitimate or impartial.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know whether you want me to be a watcher or not.
> > > > Thus far, only Jeff has formally objected to my serving as
> > > > one; Richard, Vittorio and Bruce seem to want me to. I
> > > > rather hope others will come out and say what they want as
> > > > soon as possible so I can know where I stand on this task.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Judyth
> > > >
> > > > ##########################################################
> > > > Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
> > > > Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
> > > > ##########################################################
> > > > "A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
> > > > "Un mot suffit aux sages; pour les autres, il en faut plus."
> > > > ##########################################################
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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 LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > > ================================================================
> > > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> > > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > > E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > > Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> > >
> >
> >   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >                           Name: signature.asc
> >    signature.asc          Type: application/pgp-signature
> >                    Description: This is a digitally signed message part
> 
> Regards,
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
> ================================================================
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
> 
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part