Re: [atlarge-discuss] definition of 'administer'

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

Ron Sherwood wrote:

> Sotiris:
> My reference was to your claim that the membership wanted the Panel to
> arbitrarily appoint a Panel member to chair each committee. That claim was
> false.
Not quite.  It was neither true nor false, just like your own assertions 
about what each individual voter was thinking when they were casting 
their ballot(s).  You don't know any more than I do.  Unless of course, 
you're psychic...

So, since we are in the deadlock, are you going to be a hypocrite, or 
are you going to help me get the job done until a proper process can be 
established?  You can start by sending me $1 through a verified Paypal 
account, or find some other way to adequately establish your existence, 
otherwise I may be debating with a non-entity and I do't like the 
ramifications of that idea.  I'm sure you can understand.

--Sotiris Sotiropoulos




> Ron Sherwood
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sotiris Sotiropoulos" <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>
> To: <sherwood@islands.vi>
> Cc: <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>; <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 3:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] definition of 'administer'
>
>
>  
> > > Sotiris:
> > >
> > > Thank you for the definition. I can see where it covers everything that
> > > I suggested it might mean, but I can't seem to find the part where it
> > > says "arbitrarily appoint a chairman of a separate committee without
> > > any input from the committee or the membership of the organization"
> > >      
> > Nobody's appointing anyone arbitrarily.  I stepped up like Joey Borda
> > apparently did.  Simple really.  A job needs to get done, so I'm doing it.
> > Until there is an established agreed upon process, and since nobody else
> > volunteered, why do you have such a problem with it?  You didn't seem to
> > have a problem with Joey's sel-appointment (and he wasn't even elected for
> > anything).  Why are you being a hypocrite, now?
> >
> > --Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >
> >    
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
>  
--
-----------

"The science of jurisprudence regards the state and power as the
ancients regarded fire- namely, as something existing absolutely.
But for history, the state and power are merely phenomena, just as for
modern physics fire is not an element but a phenomenon.

> From this fundamental difference between the view held by history
and that held by jurisprudence, it follows that jurisprudence can tell
minutely how in its opinion power should be constituted and what
power- existing immutably outside time- is, but to history's questions
about the meaning of the mutations of power in time it can answer
nothing."
				     --Leo Tolstoy, "War and Peace"