Re: [atlarge-discuss] Vendetta against Sotiris?

[Joey Borda **star*walker** <starwalker@gay.com>]

Vendetta: "The result of the absurd idea that one will feel better after 
one's opponent is verbally or physically hacked to bits."

[http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=vendetta]

Yep, I can see where this subject -- "Vendetta against Sotiris?" -- might 
be apt.

He does seem to have a unique ability to engender such ideas and feelings 
in other people, not unlike Jeff Williams.

The real paradox with Sotiris is that he can be so conventional and 
contrarian in his views and behavior, all at the same time and in the same 
breath. Absolutely bloody maddening, again not unlike Jeff Williams.

Conventional and contrarian, much like opposing his own election and 
accepting it at the same time.

It is his mercurialness and abusiveness which I believe ought to be of 
greater concern to us. In primary school I can just imagine Sotiris 
returning home with a report card embellished with the comment "Does not 
play well with others!"

As I have dealt with bullies and bully behavior all my life, this behavior 
of his, bullying, is no serious threat to me, rather a pesky and petty 
irritance and unnecessary distraction.

I further comment below, interspersed.

At 02:51 PM 6/8/2003 +0100, you, Richard Henderson, wrote:

> I can see the reasoning behind some people's argument for removing Sotiris
> from the panel. A parallel might be the opposition that existed in UK to the
> IRA being allowed democratic seats as long as they refused to abandon their
> weapons. In rejecting the electoral process, they were perceived by some as
> ineligible because - not acknowledging the legitimacy of any elections -
> they might at any stage resort to other means.
Following the parallel further, can we look to Sotiris to cease fire?

> Moreover, Sotiris's style is problematical to some.
Some? Care to hazard a guess? Except for other bashing-inclined persons on 
this list I will hazard that nearly all members viscerally react against 
Sotiris' abusiveness here in this list, and next to none want to go up 
against him, or appear to be going against him, for fear of becoming 
recipients of the same. Some, similarly inclined or simply seeking his 
magical protection from his bullying, even seek to be his ally.

Let's name Sotiris for what he is. He is a BULLY. And feeling somehow 
superior, LIKES TO PICK FIGHTS on the "playground."

I put it to you that the disruptive potential is immeasurable, and that 
this is what folks fear the most, fresh in the memory of the paralysis that 
overtook the previous panel, with less talented, less determined and less 
active abusers.

> However, I am really and sincerely concerned that there is a vendetta going
> on against him just because he's antagonised some people.
Here I read you to mean a *conspiratorial* vendetta. That I do not believe 
to be the case, unless you wish to make the entirely plausible stretch that 
Sotiris has lead the charge against himself through his own behavior, 
forcing and forging an unconscious conspiracy against himself.

I can assure you *I* am not part of *any* conspiracy. It would run counter 
to my values, as well as my valuing myself too much as an independent 
voice. Further I would disclose any conspiracy I knew of.

In the face of Sotiris' bully-boy behavior I take care of myself.

Others may not be so well equipped, and any concern I have is for, and 
with, them. My part in this election is now concluded, and I shall now feel 
free to jump to their defense.

> To take the IRA parallel further, the fact remained that large numbers of 
> people wanted them (or their political wing Sinn Fein) to represent them.
>
> I am sceptical about some people's motives, however much their actions can
> be backed up by 'logic'.
Richard, I do not in the least feel you questioning any motives *I* might 
have. You know me better than many by now. My statements here are to make 
myself clear and transparent to all those who may not know me as well.

Indeed there must be some, perhaps even all, among the 48 who voted for 
Sotiris who genuinely want his representation on the panel. I support their 
choice.

Therefore I OPPOSE any and all efforts to omit or remove Sotiris from the 
panel based on technicalities, omissions and commissions, rather than on 
the spirit of democracy we seek to honor and build. I cannot support this 
or any effort, in contrast to our U.S. Supreme Court, to disenfranchise 
even ONE voter.

> I am concerned to see this organisation gain a reputation for genuine
> democratic process, because we need to be able to demonstrate this, in order
> to argue the case for democratic representation on the ICANN Board. We need
> to demonstrate that it can be done.
Amen.

Perhaps it might help to establish within our own organization a Court of 
Equity, a Court of Democracy, a Wise Democratic Counsel to further our 
democratic aims, one which could independently handle the questions raised 
in this sorry affair.

Strict constructionists, conservatives, legalists might oppose such an 
idea, most probably even Sotiris. Yet it warrants our consideration.

> Sotiris didn't accept the election methods and processes, but - short of
> giving up the fight - he had no real alternative except to go along with it,
> protesting all the way.
>
> Just because he does not accept the process that took place does not mean
> (logically) that either (a) people weren't allowed to vote for him (they
> did); or (b) that he did not wish to represent them (he does).
>
> People want him to represent them. He wants to represent them. If, in
> between, the process was or was not legitimate, it is nevertheless entirely
> consistent that people (who may also question the process) *still* want him
> to represent them and that he *still* wants to represent them.
>
> Just because he objects to the process does not mean that the democratic
> will cannot be carried out.
Amen.

> I repeat, it is perfectly clear to me that a vendetta is being waged against
> Sotiris by some people who just don't like his style. The democratic
> integrity of the recent election needs to be demonstrated by an enquiry by
> an Electoral Commission charged with organising future elections; and the
> democratic integrity of the recent election needs to be demonstrated by
> respecting the wishes of the people who voted for Sotiris.
Here you will have to tell me more, name names, name motives. While I have 
perceived the actions of the responsible folks in this as legalistic, 
strict constructionist, and perhaps even opportunistic, I will not imagine 
motives beyond self-defense, self-protection, self-preservation, and by 
extension a same attempt in behalf of our organization.

I agree with your call for an Electoral Commission, and respect for the 
wishes of the people who voted for Sotiris.

> If, as you have argued, the election was fair, then you should accept the
> wish of the electorate to have Sotiris on the panel.
>
> This, too, is a logical argument which deserves some recognition of being
> reasonable.
[Spoken to...]

> My motive, as I say, is not vendetta or favouritism for Sotiris, but defence
> of the democratic process... without which, we can never present a moral
> case for ICANN, too, to introduce democratic processes and integrity.
Ditto.

/s/ Joey Borda/Bordo

Sunday, June 08, 2003 * 12:17 PM EDT USA

mailto:starwalker@gay.com
mailto:starwalker@starwalker.org
Yahoo! Messenger ID: starwalkeratgaydotcom

> Yrs,
>
> Richard Henderson