Re: [ga] Moving Discussion -- Call on the Chair

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

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001 21:39:43 -0400, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
Subject: Re: [ga] Moving Discussion -- Call on the Chair

> Patrick, I take issue with being called pretty much a liar for no good
> reason at all.  I am not equivocating on this "motion", I am trying to
> get a better understanding of its circumstances, scope, and intent.  If
> it is also against the rules to ask questions, then what exactly *is*
> allowed by the "rules"?

Dear Sotiris

On reflection I may have been more brusque than I meant.  If so I apologise.
It certainly was not my intention to ascribe any motivation (such as lying)
to your comments.

Should any such inference be made, I withdraw it unreservedly.

In fact, I have always respected your good will and, as you made clear
in an earlier email, your intention was, as you say, to probe the underlying
implications.  I respect that and responded amending the wording a little.

My comments were merely meant to say that too much examination of the
*next step* prevents us from taking the *first step*.  The motion is really
quite simple.  It is to prevent continuing disruption of substantive debate
with arguments about procedural issues.  I'd value your support.

The fact is that the General Assembly is totally incapable of getting any
work done or even any motion passed.

I think that is shameful.

There really is significant support for the motion.  Should you agree, I am
sure that Danny would assist by recognising the desirability of separating
substantive and procedural issues.

Otherwise the GA debate will be entirely stifled by continuing diversions.

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