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

Re: [ga] Re: [ga-full] Use of "loon"

On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Alex Kamantauskas wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
> > Tyranny of the majority.   How to silence dissent. 
>  With all respect, I don't believe that will happen.  Here is my thought
>  process (and yes, I am amenable to having my thought process changed ;-)
>  Currently, the SAA receives a complaint, and decides 'yes' or 'no'. 

You forget the SAA can generate his own complaint.

> If we allow the list to vote 'yes' or 'no', then the spectre of
> 'silencing  dissent' is raised.  However, the SAA knows that 'dissent'
> is not grounds for sanction,

Umm, keep in mind that we are talking about the same SAA who, in an
earlier message stated in effect that it was ok to refer to one list
member as a "loon."

>  vote.  A person who dissents, and does so in an insulting and disruptive
>  manner, does not have the right to remain on the list solely because they
>  are a 'dissenter'.

Yet we have a situation where more than one person has stated they believe
it is ok to call a specific member of the list a loon. Doubtlessly, were
someone to refer to them as such, they would take offense. So it would
seem that the term "insulting" is subject to a great deal of

>  I agree.  I'm still uncomfortable with the fact that one person decides
>  who gets to play and who goes home (although I have full confidence in
>  Harald's decisions.)  

I don't.

                               Patrick Greenwell                          
                       Earth is a single point of failure.

This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html