Speaking as someone who is not a member of the SF Party, I think it would be easier if those who are being fingered as "bad" are simply fingered and offered a chance to explain themselves -- with those who are making the accusation explaining what their perception of the problem is. Ambiguity is a bad thing in situations like these.
As a peninsula resident, I second TJ's comments about how difficult it is to get to and from LPSF meetings. For those of us who don't live in the city, it's an incredible pain in the backside. For the most part, my attendance at LPSF meetings is to be in touch with my favorite local branch of the LP, not because I'm a voting member -- if the suggestion is that non-San-Franciscans should steer clear of the LPSF list, I'd actually understand the reasoning! There are broader debate forums available elsewhere.
I also have to admit that I don't quite see all the "bad" things that people are supposedly doing. Have there been heated discussions? Absolutely. But these are troubled times, with lots of disagreement, and those discussions are bound to happen, even internally to the LP.
Frankly, though, if we didn't respect each other enough to disagree, we wouldn't be having these debates. I certainly don't go wandering in to Republican or Democratic mailing lists to debate points with those guys. I'd hate to see that debate disappear, since it will simply be picked up elsewhere (and the outcomes of these debates in Denver will arguably determine whether there will even *be* an LP in a few years' time).
Cheers,
Brian
Tim Campbell <profreedomradical@...> wrote: Meetings on Saturday in a large city with expensive
parking and my hatred for public transportation, plus
the fact that I work until 7am most Friday nights...
into Saturday mornings in Sunnyvale, means I doubt I
will make too many more SF meetings. I have been to 1
so far, after Ron Paul's visit in July.
On another note, it's as easy for me to hurl insults
in public as it is online, to those I think are insane
or bad for the party. I have thick skin and a strong
conscience myself, and am not worried about defending
the positions I hold, as the positions I hold, and my
moderate tone on the key issues, are what is winning
elections for republicans, democrats and even
libertarians or libertarian-leaning candidates.
Although, as you may remember, I do apologize when I
go over the deep end which I already did on this list.
I think everyone just needs to be careful what they
post and also, certain people just need to take a
chill pill and not be so hypersensitive when someone
is bashing into their huge ego and is against them on
a position. It's just simple banter and debate... get
over yourselves. We aren't as important (yet) as we
all wish we were.
-TJ Campbell
--- dredelstein@... wrote:
> Derek,
>
> I apologize if I was unclear in my recommendation.
> It refers to those censured who have never attended
> at least two meetings. Of course, this not apply to
> you.
>
> I suspect most of our emailers hurling insults would
> not attend the required meetings and rather, would
> never be heard from again. Not because our meetings
> are unbearable, but rather because it's easy and fun
> (for some) to dash off an insulting email, it takes
> a bit of effort to get down to a meeting.
>
> In addition, there's the embarrassment factor.
> Believe it or not, people usually realize they're
> acting inappropriately. They would tend to feel
> embarrassed to present themselves in the flesh.
>
> Phil, what would it take to get my suggestion
> adopted?
>
> Best, Michael
>
> From: Derek Jensen
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 9:36 AM
> Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: Request for Input on the
> Future of this List
>
>
> I'll add in my two cents:
>
> 1. I have not come to meetings as of late. It's
> hard with my work
> hours and having 4 children to justify breaking away
> at such a prime
> time for them.
> 2. However, I do enjoy reading and posting to the
> list, try to be
> constructive as possible (albeit often provocative),
> and feel my
> perspectives have been expanded and my mind changed
> on several points
> by listening to reasoned, logical arguments
> (Starchild, Phil, Mike A,
> Mike E, Mike D you know who you are)
> 3. I'd be dismayed if I was cut off from the list
> since I wasn't
> attending meetings.
>
> -Derek
>
> — In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Denny"
> <mike@…> wrote:
> >
> > :>)
> >
> >
> >
> > Well I don't know about "punishment"…but it
> might be a way to
> help
> > people get to know each other better so they are
> more sympathetic
> > perhaps…
> >
> >
> >
> > Good idea Michael…
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com [mailto:lpsf-
> discuss@yahoogroups.com]
> > On Behalf Of Acree, Michael
> > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 9:04 AM
> > To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [lpsf-discuss] Request for Input on
> the Future of this
> List
> >
> >
> >
> > That seems to me a very fitting punishment.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com [mailto:lpsf-
> discuss@yahoogroups.com]
> > On Behalf Of dredelstein@…
> > Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 8:22 PM
> > To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Request for Input on
> the Future of this
> List
> >
> >
> >
> > Add my name to those who wish to improve the tone
> on our list.
> >
> >
> >
> > It seems clear the offending parties consist only
> of those people
> who
> > don't attend our monthly meetings. It would be
> interesting to
> discuss
> > the relationship between not attending meetings
> and sending
> offensive
> > emails. However, I prefer to focus on solutions.
> >
> >
> >
> > I suggest if a moderator judges an emailers tone
> to be offensive,
> the
> > guilty party be barred from posting until they
> attend at least two
> > meetings in the flesh.
> >
> >
> > Best, Michael
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Amarcy D. Berry <mailto:amarcyb@…>
> >
> > To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com <mailto:lpsf-
> discuss@yahoogroups.com>
> >
> > Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 9:06 PM
> >
> > Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Request for Input on the
> Future of this List
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Often, the LPSF has patted itself on the back as
> to the fun, fair,
> > courteous and caring nature of the Discuss and
> Activists Lists.
> > Lately, we moderators are tired of wondering how
> to bring back those
> > good vibes.
> >
> > Here are my suggestions:
> >
> > 1. Admit that there are subjects that are
> non-negotiable, they are
> a
> > matter of faith. No amount of balderdash or
> double speak is going
> to
> > change anyone's mind.
> >
> > 2. Realize that this list is blessed with an
> amazing diversity of
> > approach to life, with just one characteristic in
> common: a
> dedication
> > to working towards freedom from authoritarian
> rule.
> >
> > 3. Forget the insults, snide remarks, self
> promotion – your
> audience
> > around here will tune you out.
> >
> > I just said to the other moderators that I would
> be the willing
> > sacrificial lamb, and post my personal feelings
> — rather than zap
> > anyone into eternity (electronically speaking).
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Marcy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
>
=== message truncated ===