RE: [atlarge-discuss] The devil's trap

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

Whilst I can appreciate the caution which dictated your suggestions I
personally feel the extra caution is unnecessary.  At present the
organisation is operating as an unincorporated Association and the
members dictate what is acceptable until the formal rules are applied.
The members have voted in the panel to manage such things until such
time as the organisation is established enough to apply a more formal
structure, as such, the panel has the power to maintain order and the
integrity of the organisation until the formal structure is in place.

Any talk of legal action against the organisation can be discounted.  It
has no basis.  There may be some basis for individual against individual
action but nothing involving the organisation directly.

Joops idea of social alienation may work the best however, if it could
be total.  If everyone just ignored JW, the effect would be more
pronounced than trying to ban him.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch


|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: JFC Morfin @large [mailto:jfc@atlarge.ws]
|> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 5:45 AM
|> To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
|> Subject: [atlarge-discuss] The devil's trap
|>
|>
|> I think all of you should think twice about the method to
|> use to ban Jeff
|> Williamses.
|>
|> IMHO this affair is an organized trap. That trap was set-up
|> the day I
|> started the election process: Jeff Williams was the clone
|> chosen to blow
|> it, even in committing e-suicide. JWs was to organize a
|> clash in opposing
|> and in adding "unacceptable" acts. Among others it was
|> disclosing its VID,
|> claiming ballots where spam, the Jeff/Jeff lunchon, now this
|> mail. Next it
|> would be insulting Vint or GW Bush.
|>
|> What they want is to oblige the Panel to vote the ban of JWs
|> and look a
|> stupid group a nazi folks.
|>
|> The Panel has not the power (no by-laws) nor the capacity
|> (Thomas has
|> consistently refused to ban anyone) to ban Jeff. It has
|> documented (Joop)
|> that it could not and needed another list. So what, they
|> vote and get
|> refused? Looks nice.
|>
|> Would Thomas accept, they would claim it is biased (hurting Thomas'
|> reputation) that the Panel is a joke (quoting Sotiris) and
|> that thye want
|> to punish JWs from saying it from the very first day. And it
|> will look a
|> joke as everyone, including Joanna and Danny, know that
|> banning JWs will
|> not ban its author.
|>
|> BTW, this happens just when the GA is disrupted. Any relation?
|>
|>
|> What I would propose would be:
|>
|> 1. to create another list with the same members, under the
|> open minded
|> control of the Panel (so no one can object).
|>
|> 2. expose the case to the whole Membership and ask it to
|> vote on it. This
|> would:
|>
|>      - show the Panel respects its role and duties
|>      - this is an exceptional decision, with an exceptional
|> procedure, for
|> an exceptional fault
|>      - this will let know everyone that at last an action has been
|> undertaken against manipulators
|>      - may be there could be two questions : do you want to
|> ban - to join
|> the new list.
|>        It could be good outreach. All the more if the GA is
|> not resurected.
|>      - everyone would know it was handled in the open, and
|> would know about
|> it.
|>        End of JWs. Very strong warning to the clone maker.
|>
|> Jefsey
|>
|>
|> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
|> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
|>
|>



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