Re: [ga] Question to Jeff Williams

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 00:07:06 EDT, Danny Younger wrote:
> You have argued that the rules of this Assembly are "illegitimate".   Is
> it your intention to continue violating the rules of this Assembly?

Dear Danny

Thank you for participating in the debate but that's not how it is done.

Jeff Williams has said the rules are "illegitimate".  I'd guess that
somebody drafted a set of rules based on discussion on this list.  Perhaps
there were even debates about the method of adopting the rules (voting
procedures, etc.).  Clearly you then have a boot-strap paradox.

Of course, any vote cannot be "legitimate" until the voting procedures have
been set up first.  And anyone can refute the legitimacy of a process.  Some
use this argument against the list monitors, the sublists, anything at all.

On occasions, people question the legitimacy so hard that they pull down
the system.  It happened with "apartheid" which was seen as legitimate
but immoral.  It nearly happened with the presidential election in Florida.
Certainly it happened with discrimination in Australia and the US.

Now we had this before when a person was suspended for excess postings.
He said the list limit was illegitimate because it had not been sanctioned
by
the Chair.  Nevertheless, the punishment was still enforced.  That sort of
thing happens everytime there's an execution in the US.

But none of what Jeff said is against the list rules as they are constituted
at present.  It seems to me that you break the rules of the General Assembly
by suggesting that about Jeff.

You should respect the system and submit a complaint to the list monitors?

Or do you want to make the system look REALLY illegitimate??

Best regards
Patrick Corliss


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