Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:26:11 -0400
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>, WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Important question about the Minutes
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

At 01:38 PM 10/26/2005 -0400, Elspeth Kovar wrote:
>At 08:10 PM 10/25/2005, Mike B. wrote:
>>At 02:56 PM 10/25/2005 -0700, N Lynch wrote:
>>
>> >If a person does not have the guts to be identified in
>> >public with words said in public, then they should
>> >request that the remarks be withdrawn from the record.
>> > And the request should be honored as we all say
>> >things we either regret or can't stand behind.  We all
>> >make mistakes or find what we might have said is not
>> >the most politic of remarks.  If the move to change
>> >the VA meeting place is because some people hate Lee,
>> >then be honest enough with the rest of the club to say
>> >so.
>>
>>There was no motion to change the VA meeting place.
>>
>>I raised the issue as New Business due to several members having stated
>>that they would no longer attend meetings at the Gillilands.  Given the
>>identities of some, it could have an impact on the meeting if that occurs.
>
>No, there wasn't a motion but it did come up and was discussed.  I was
>concerned at the time since it was such a small meeting but in retrospect
>think that it was the right thing to do.

The meeting had a quorum, so it was proper to discuss anything club-related
at it from a "legal" standpoint.  From an ethical one, or even from basic
politeness, it would have been very questionable to change meeting
locations without the Gillilands present, unless they'd sent word that
their home was no longer an option, which they didn't.  However, given the
issues of attendance by several members, and the bylaw requirement that the
next location be named at the prior meeting, it had to be raised and
settled for sure at Third Friday where the next First Friday would be...and
it was.  The overall issue of where future meetings should be held remains
an issue however, and will have to be settled at another meeting.
Hopefully one where all concerned parties are in attendance and once any
fact-gathering necessary has been completed.

>>"In the representative system, the reason for everything must publicly
>>appear. Every man is a proprietor in government, and considers it a
>>necessary part of his business to understand.  It concerns his interest
>>because it affects his property.  He examines the cost, and compares it
>>with the advantages; and above all, he does not adopt the slavish custom of
>>following what in other governments are called 'leaders'."
>>
>>                                 -- Tom Paine, _Rights of Man_ (1791-92)
>
>I've disagreed with some of the things that Paine wrote, and in this am not
>comfortable with the word "property" although it was the right one for the
>time.  The nation has also grown immeasurably since then so leaders are
>needed.  Leaders are also often needed to help organize discussion.
>
>But those are minor compared to what he said overall.

I agree on the property point.  That was as much an issue at that time as
civil rights are for us today, so it isn't surprising that many statements
revolved around the subject.

On the leaders point I disagree slightly.  You seem to have read the
statements as saying that leaders were not necessary, while I believe the
actual point was that "...the slavish custom of following..." leaders is
what was being denigrated.  That one should consider the situation and
choose for oneself which direction to go, or who to follow in that
direction if someone is organizing along that route already perhaps, not
just blindly follow because one's leader has said that is the right way to
go.

If you can say why you believe a course of action is correct, and that
reason is not "because so-and-so says it is", then you are probably not
slavishly following anyone...though you may well be supporting someone who
agrees with you as they organize things and lead the assembled citizenry
off to implement it.

-- Mike B.
--
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it.
 Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can
exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary
right to dismember it or overthrow it." -- Abraham Lincoln, 4 April 1861