Re: [ga] Abusing consensus in the Transfers TF
Thursday, Thursday, March 28, 2002, 4:56:04 PM, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> This is why a registrant organization such as the IDNO , where spokespeople
> could be elected by a credible mass of registrants and speak with a proper
> mandate, had to be fought tooth and claw for 3 years or taken over.
Oh please. Spokespeople in the IDNO were only elected if they agreed
to tow the Joop line. There was no mandate with that. The members
stood up to your bullying and dictatorial control, and I have to say
that since that time, the quality of the discussion and the tone has
been much improved. People can disagree and compromise without
turning it into a war, which was how you insisted things be done since
it was either your way or no way.
And when you lost, despite no one asking you to leave the list, and
despite a strong sentiment that you would be immediately allowed to
return, you chose to completely leave and have nothing to do with it.
What is happening now is people are working together through
compromise, consensus, and common sense. If only you had agreed to do
that months ago, the IDNO would be much further along right now. But
instead you wanted to make it all one way or the other.
The members decided that someone who was going to play that game was
not welcome. You are the one who advocated that the members would
have the right to do that to other members.
We reap what we sow, Joop.
William X Walsh <email@example.com>
Save Internet Radio!
CARP will kill Webcasting!
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html