Re: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)

[Joe Baptista <baptista@pccf.net>]

On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:

>     I mention the situation when in a debate (here ICANN/DNSO GA business)
>     a personnal attack is targetting somebody's reputation as
>     a woman or a mother (should be also as a men and a father,
>     but recent exemple on this forum was mostly aimed at women).
>     I do not think that this kind of "disorderly words" should
>     be consider as common as others, if we still claim to be humans,
>     with some meaning attached to it.

Elisabeth - you finally managed to slink out of your cave for this
one.  Good.  Now Robert rules were writen back in 1915 - so I agree they
are mens rules - but as women's organizations have discovered - some
simple word relacement will suffice.

Here's and example of an assembly reply which qualifies under roberts
rules ..

"The lady me thinks is in desparate need of an education, she is deficient
in her understanding of the logic of the process."

Now elezabeth why don't you stand up on your hind legs and provide
disclosure on who your censoring, why they are being censored and who is
responsible.  Make me proud baby.

Regards
Joe Baptista