Re: [ga] The Tower of Babble

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

"William S. Lovell" wrote:

> Anything that depends upon the presence or absence of a "working lunch"
> in even the slightest way would not be worth 1/1000th of the cost of a
> ticket to Stockholm.

Who's paying your way Bill?

> If the ducks haven't been lined up well before now,
> nothing will come of them.  This whole "mike time" bit is a charade -- is
> not useless babble here enough;  must it also be endured in Stockholm?

Depends on what you classify as useless babble.  I am understanding you better now.

> Useful effort is called planning and preparation, not the latest flash of
> electrons across the cerebellum of someone seeking public exposure,
> fame, and glory. And a vote? With a few minutes worth of thought, at
> best?

Try a few *thousand* minutes.  Anybody who would be interested in being present and
voting on any motion or issue raised, has quite probably been around long enough to know
the lay of the land, Bill.  You yourself have commented on the small, incestuous nature
of the GA.  So what are you really saying?

> A more effective prescription for disaster could hardly be imagined.

Where have we heard this before, I wonder?    Sounds like the rallying cry of the
oligarchs in old Athens.

> And I would ascribe what lack of a clear program of work there is to
> the babble, not the other way around.

Did you vote in the election of the Chair and alt-Chair, Bill?

> I believe the Chair and Alternate
> Chair to have earned high congratulations to get two resolutions on board
> -- I hadn't thought they could do it -- against such a background of noise.

I have been listening myself Bill...  You've been adding to the babble though Bill.  Come
on, be honest (I've been reading your largely irrelevant, and unsubstantial postings, we
all have.).  ;-)

> The questioning of credibility comes from the incessant racket of a
> very few, only some of whom I shall name: Jeff Williams, Jefsey, and
> last, but not least, Sotiris.

Please compare my posting history over the past month to your own.  Then, let's talk
about racket.  Bill, you and I both know, just because you talk a lot it doesn't mean
you're saying anything.  <shrug> BTW, your naming of people in this post can be
considered an abuse.

> There are others whose ability to resist
> emulating great literature can get quite wearing, but sometimes within
> all that twaddle they actually say things worth hearing.

{The next round's on me Bill.}
Then there are those self-important empty types who think they're fooling others.  But we
wouldn't know anything about that, huh Bill?

> There is also a
> "Terminator" in the crowd here, but he often seeks to terminate just what
> so needs to be, not incessantly.

Actually Bill, I could characterize your posting as an element of the incessant noise and
vituperation.  It's actually quite amusing.

> It's just the knee-jerk negativists whom
> I have named, and some others, so I say that instead of staring breathlessly
> out into the ring as the toreador steps forth and the bull starts to charge,
> with the crowd screaming for failure so as to watch the blood flow, let's
> just all shut up and let those who have the job, do it.

Do what exactly?  What job do they have?  The last time I checked, the Chair was supposed
to be nothing other than a moderator of discussion, and NOT the keynote speaker.  Think
about this point, Bill, the Lawyer... before you have another wrist-jerk reaction and
decide to respond before reflecting.

> The foregoing is not
> meant to emulate great literature, especially not Hemingway, but sometimes
> images are better than literal words, and it is precisely that image that what
> Sotiris proposes brings to my mind.

Wrong image Bill.  BTW, I never liked Hemingway... I found him droll and devoid of
substance, much like your posting Bill.

Regards,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

>
>
> Bill Lovell
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>
> > Dear Company,
> >
> > The GA has disintegrated into babble, pure and simple.  I ascribe this, in large
> > part, to no clear program of work.  The coming meeting in Stockholm may only serve
> > to emphasize this point.  How can the GA expect to be taken seriously, when its own
> > members no longer take it seriously, and even question its credibility?
> >
> > Mssrs. Chair, and Alt-Chair, outcome reflects on leadership.  Don't get carried
> > away with the party-favours and other mementos of the occasion...   I will be be
> > watching the webcast closely, as will many others.  Perhaps we will add our voices
> > in the public participation.  But, we're going to need a commitment from our
> > colleagues who are at the meeting, to ensure that all voices will be given a fair
> > chance.  It will also be interesting to see how the time will be allotted for the
> > various discussions.   If necessary, will the meeting run over/through
> > lunch/dinner/breakfast and even overtime?  Or will it be the ersatz performance yet
> > again?  (Considering the gravity of the matters to be discussed, I think a working
> > lunch is not too much to be expected, surely?  I remember Esther Dyson herself
> > deigning to dine and do... that is, if memory serves me correctly.)  I would even
> > like to see a motion or two with real and virtual participation in a vote!
> > (`wishful thinking', I know)  Is this GA really going to happen gentlemen?  Let us
> > see your resolve, will, and character over the next two weeks.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
>          Bill Lovell
>
> http://cerebalaw.com/biog.htm

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