5/8 Adam Glass is the newest elite who believes that wallall should
be deleted. Do you think that it is acceptable for the elite to
dictate what programs you may use? wallall will be deleted on
Monday after the Politburo meeting unless something is done.
\_ no it won't, because adam's solution is extreme and everyone
else agreed so, shannon. but people ought to chill out and
respect each other a bit while walling. -george
\what if i have no respect for someone outside wall-world --psb
\_ That's censorship, which is to say restriction of
a specific type of speech by those people who control
the allocation of the resources for that speech. Is
that acceptable?
\_ Um, actually, I don't think that's censorship. If
they control the resources, then they *control* *the*
*resources*, and can do what they want. Censorship
is restriction of speech by someone who doesn't control
the resource, like the government. If you want soda
to be un-managed, say so.
\uh how do you censor if you dont have control? --psb
\_ Yes. There is no excuse for tolerating electronic
harrassment in the name of free speech. -gwh
\No, there is no reason for tolerating dumb speech
in the name of george. When all you need to do is
"electronically close you eyes" [wallall -n], its
tough to make the case this is harassment.
besides, wallall preserves ample records and witnesses
if you want to make the case for harassment. --psb
\_If you don't like elites making decisions, then we can throw
this to the general membership. Easy. -dpassage
\_ RIght....the 20 or so people who attend CSUA general
meetings aren't the elite, eh?
\what do people think about re-writing the CSUA const
to include a machine supervision cmte which will make
policies for the machine(s) independent of the politburo,
who will continue to run other csua activites. you could
maybe have 1 person per 50 or 100 [or whatever] users ...
this way this group will be reasonably representative of the
membership ... the 5person ex-com certainly is not ...
especially when they arbitrarily choose a bunch of their
friends to help make policy at the exclusion of orthers.
\_ you're just offended because you have no friends.
and this group will presmable feel responsive to their
"constituency" if they want to be re-relected.
please send *me* input on this idea. --psb
\_We could take the vote electronically. I'm working
on a couple of ideas on how we could do this.-dpassage
\-- You don't seem to understand. You elected these
bozos. They can do whatever they want. If they
voted to turn off soda tonight and never turn it
back on, they could do it. A general meeting
could overturn, but that's it. [This actually
sidesteps the issue that you DID NOT elect Adam
Glass - because he is a friend of the politburo,
he is CLEARLY getting preferential treatment.
That is a problem for another day though].
^ Adam Glass, the CSUA's Hilary Clinton.
What a concept.
\_ More like our Stalin
\_I don't see how Adam is getting special treatment. He proposed
a policy change. I said we'd vote on it, and asked for public
input. Any other user is welcome to do the same. And I'm not
pretending that a Politburo meeting can be a general meeting;
if opinion at the meeting is overwhelmingly one way (which it
appears it is), then the status quo will remain. If Adam wants
to push it further, which is his right under our const., I'm
\_ I am not at all convinced that free speech is more important
than the cohesiveness of the Organization. -- Marco
\-you're free to leave. i think free speech is more imp
than your being a member. |
http://csua.com/feed/