On 23 Mar 2006, Eileen Goodman wrote: >Pam, > Amazing what you folks do to justify censorship. Hi, Eileen! Moderation is not exactly censorship, but it's close. > I have learned so much from participation on these private boards. Glad to hear it. > The big difference between me and the rest of you is that while > I'll support everyone's rights to participate in this New democratically, > suppose to be, Pacifica - YOU folks - want to wipe out anyone who > does not go along the Carol Spooner Progressive Faction partyline..... Yours is a relatively unique perspective on this, I think. Others see differences in frequency of postings, typical level of message topicality, overall message quality, general list behavior and rules compliance, and/or friendliness of tone as of greater significance in differentiating among groupings of list members than the single issue of whether or not certain members should be placed on moderation. > you don't play fair.... I've stood up against your mindset. Your perception of fairness may also be rather unique. The list rules seem both fair and fairly applied to me, and I see quite a range of mindsets on display in this group. > This NewPacifica board has done the job of eliminating anyone > who disagrees. Since you're still here and disagreeing, this statement would appear to be an exageration. > And Jim Demaget - he's one of you, playing his own nasty role > giving you and others justification to censor...... Jim DeMaegt cannot reasonably be assigned an affiliation to any grouping characterized as "the Carol Spooner Progressive Faction." His nastiness only potentially justifies the moderation of Jim DeMaegt. > And Pam - I'm really disappointed if what you say below is true > because. again - I'm against all factions, sides and whatever.... Absolute anti-factionalism defines a certain faction, actually, though pehaps with only you as a member by this time. There is, however, a thread of anti-factionalism to be found in each faction that persists, if you look closely for it. > but you folks have had the power, the communication, the > organizing of a faction long before anyone other group decided > to do so..... Whomever has dediicatedly organized for the improvement of Pacifica deserves credit for any success they may have obtained, not blame; but the perception that anyone on this list has "the power" is enormously skewed. I have the power of a voice in KPFK's local station governance and a voice on certain PNB Committees, but this does not guarantee that I will be recognized at LSB meetings, or that my advice will be followed there, or that my resolutions won't be voted down -- and Pacifica's governance itself has very little power within the organization at this stage of democratization, because of the disruptive and distracting behavior of others involved and the persistent resistance of management to any real oversight. Factionalism remains because various individuals who disagree with each other have various levels of power or influence in the organization and various ideas of what Pacifica is or should become. > For the record: Carol Spooner needs to be held accountable for > the faction-mindset that supported her and she in turn supported..... I believe she accepts full responsibility for the role she played, but it takes at least two to Tango. > Did she pass the bar - is she a lawyer? Carol got her law degree and passed her bar exams long ago, but never took the additional steps needed to become licensed to practice as an attorney in the state of California. > What happened to Carol? Your favorite target has left the battlefield but remains involved as a member of the Foundation. > And Gregory what kind of lawyer is he - really? Alan Gregory Wonderwheel is licensed to practice law in the State of California and is admitted to practice in the United States District Court, Northern District of California. His practice is in the areas of Civil Litigation, Labor/Employment, Probate, Conservatorship, Guardianship, Elder Law & Elder Abuse, Nonprofit Corporations, and Taxpayer Lawsuits to Challenge Laws and Ordinances. > How come they became so powerful in creating this nightmear > definition Pacifica now has. Legal knowledge, sharp analysis, and general wisdom explain the influence of Carol and Gregory in helping set the general parameters of listener empowerment; but Carol's simple draft bylaws recommendation was ignored and whatever nightmare we may have is largely the responsibility of the many others involved. > How come they have exited the scene? I suspect that we bore them. > Oh that's right Gregory has reappeared to suggest a committee looking > into all you-folks-have-done would be a "witch-hunt"... The committee could be used in a "witch-hunt," but there is no mention in its mandate that its investigations are to be limited to members of "the Carol Spooner faction." > when it is plain to those of us documenting - you folks don't have a good > track record when it comes to dialogue or actions, you folks don't play > fair..... Some of us do have a fairly good track record and do play fair, despite several obstacles about which you may be unaware. > Yes - looks like elections are coming up and your board is clear of > opposition now - you'll be free to spin Opposition remains, and all sides spin during an election campaign. --Terry Goodman, KPFK Delegate New Pacifica Working Group http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica 'Save Our Stations!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewPacifica/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: NewPacifica-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/