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