Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:58:06 -0500
From: Ted White <twhite8 at cox.net>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: New list (was Re: This list is... )
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

Rich Lynch wrote:

>  --- "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>
> > The fact that WSFA chose to make a Communist agent, Yahoo, rather
> > than me, an ex-WSFAn, their official list owner shows the club's
> > deep contempt for me, and, indirectly, for the rights and freedoms
> > of all its members. I should have left the club years earlier.
>
>  To review the bidding: It was your choice to leave the club, just as,
>  earlier, it was your choice to blow up something that was a feud
>  between two people into an issue that WSFA was forced to deal with.
>  That escalation should never have been allowed to happen at that
>  First Friday meeting; a disagreement between two members should never
>  have become club business. I certainly would have objected to
>  consideration if I'd been there.

This is a gross mischaracterization of Lee Gilliland's unrelenting and
malicious attacks on Keith.  You appear to regard both sides of this
"feud" as equally responsible for it.  That would be flatly wrong.  And
to the extent that Keith was a WSFA officer and Lee a WSFA trustee (as
well as meeting co-host, given to pronouncements over who was and who
was not welcome at meetings), this "disagreement" certainly *was* "club
business."

But I applaud the club for burying its collective heads in the sand and
ignoring the situation as best it could.  You don't care that you lost
its hardest-working member, or that the WSFA archives are now being
thrown into disarray.  You just want properly conducted business
meetings and the careful stewardship of WSFA's "brand."

--Ted White