[NewPacifica] Re: screening process???



--- In NewPacifica@y..., jim Dingeman <jimdingeman@y...> wrote:
> Why don't you let the listeners decide...in all their
> thousands and tens of thousands...involve them in the
> debate over poistions and policies...

That is exactly what needs to be done. WBAI has some very 
sensible listeners out there. As a listener, I wouldn't 
want it any other way.

Yeah, you are
> right...if the Stalinist element comes up with their
> Politburo idea revamped...well this is a national
> fight and I will be totally immersed and in it.

Chainsaw firmly in hand, no doubt.

> Love and kisses

Hah! You imagine you could live to be so lucky?
Vajra


> 
> 
> 
> -- nuralanwar <nuralanwar@y...> wrote:
> > Hmm, well, after a couple of readings I don't see
> > any "process 
> > for screening" at all in the KPFA process on
> > wbai.net. Maybe I'm 
> > missing something, I hope. True enough that PC
> > standards of any 
> > kind are no guarantee that a person will be any damn
> > good on a 
> > board -- I know some so-called progressives who talk
> > the talk to 
> > perfection & go through community organizations like
> > one-person 
> > chain-saw massacres. Having all your dogma down
> > doesn't mean 
> > diddly. So I think that there should be some way of
> > screening 
> > people based on bad previous performance, inasmuch
> > as I do not 
> > believe that polite overlooking of one-person
> > chain-saw massacres 
> > will serve us well. The trick is to come up with
> > some objective 
> > criteria for determining who is at high risk for
> > this ... or so 
> > they say. With any luck, we will arrive at something
> > that you 
> > will really hate, Jim. Because then we might be able
> > to get a 
> > really good board.
> > Vajra
> > 
> > 
> > --- In NewPacifica@y..., jim Dingeman
> > <jimdingeman@y...> wrote:
> > > The criterion set in thge KPFA process for
> > screening
> > > are pretty adequate.
> > > Setting absurdly high PC standards for the
> > candidate
> > > pool is  the same process that others might want
> > to
> > > substitute with some etraordinary method to
> > appoint
> > > self-selected by 20 people LAB appointed reps.
> > > The key issue is that the listeners are excluded
> > from
> > > the give and take and repartee of debate and
> > colliquoy
> > > on air...they are presented with a carefully
> > filtered
> > > pool of Lab candiadtes that are not produced by
> > some
> > > democratically accessible debate process where
> > ideasd
> > > and positions are discussed and freely thouught
> > about.
> > > Jim     
> > > 
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
> > 
> > > http://auctions.yahoo.com
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > 
> > New Pacifica Working Group
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
> > 'Save Our Stations!'
> > 
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > NewPacifica-unsubscribe@e...
> >  
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! 
> http://auctions.yahoo.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
Monitoring Service trial
http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/xYTolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

New Pacifica Working Group
http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
'Save Our Stations!'

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
NewPacifica-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 




questions/problems with archive to: webmaster@mcabee.org
Mail converted by MHonArc 2.4.7