For the Record Nalini, Renteria, Freeland and Cohen did not vote on the bylaws approval. As repugnant and grotesque as the results of the bylaws process are; it was in fact the interim National Board composed of people who are the only ones who actually were qualified to change the bylaws of Pacifica under it's previous bylaws and did just exactly that. The settlement wisely gave what fundamentally amounted to a veto power over the abortion that spewed forth but sadly the local boards in the end didn't have the political will to call an abortion the bio waste that it is and instead chose to suckle and nurse it until it took on a new life of stench and constant rot and decay spreading to everything around it. Which is actually not that much different if it had not been aborted. Think Henry and the baby from the movie Eraserhead. M/ LasiewiczN@xxxxxxx wrote: > > In a message dated 6/29/2008 12:20:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > aachen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes: > > Oh yes, deb, let us never speak ill of the dead. > > > Hi Greg: > > I appreciate your stance, but truly I didn't speak ill of Lorraine. I > just gave her as example of how people in New Pacifica have been doing > work that they are not qualified for. > > What qualified her to vote on the new bylaws?? Absolutely nothing. Or > Spooner, for that matter? Or Radford or Renteria or Cohen or > Freedland? I think that the whole settlement process was a grotesque > injustice as far as the Pacifica Foundation goes. There are those who > are new obsessed in trying to make the bylaws work, and Frank > maintains that we're stuck with them for life (I doubt it.) But in > this thread, I was just making the point that the bylaws and new > structure is a very bad mistake. > > Kevin said that the New Pacifica structure was supposed to allow > listeners at the table. I'm saying that there are some tables that > must be reserved. People think that a "democracy" means that everyone > should be able to do everything. That's just silly. > > The new structure of Pacifica as a Membership organization was poorly > conceived. Lorraine and all the other LAB members at that time (those > who hadn't resigned after all the Lawsuits were filed) were called > upon to vote on those new bylaws. Why? What made them expert or > qualified? No resumes were checked, no one was vetted. It's my > contention that in New Pacifica, the wrong people have been at the > table. I think that qualifications and skill and expertise are > important factors. If I wanted new electrical wiring in my kitchen > would I hire locksmith for the job? > > Lorraine isn't the only one. There were about 100 other LAB members > across the country who were unqualified to restructure a multi-million > dollar five station radio network. > > When I was a peacenik in Venice, handing out blue ribbons for nuclear > disarmament and playing peace songs on my guitar, I might have thought > that I, too, was just as good as the next person to made decisions in > a "democracy." However, after ten years of running an international > trade show, launching two corporations, hiring and managing staff on > both coasts, negotiating real business contracts with > serious organizations and working the venues and suppliers, I was > infinitely more qualified to run a business and to make judgements > about how to run a business. > > Coming to Pacifica during the turmoil of the bylaws rewrite, I > happened to be in a better position to judge what was going on than > most of the LAB members. I'm not saying I'm a better human being, but > I can say that at least I know what I don't know. A lot of the folks > who wrote these bylaws, approved the bylaws and who have come to the > table since then really don't seem to know what they don't know. I > guess this message is hard to swallow. > > Nalini > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used > cars <http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007>. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1525 - Release Date: 6/29/2008 > 3:09 PM >