Hi,
Sodom <sodom@ma.ultranet.com> writes:
<<
These problems are definitely real - I agree it is not an easy thing
to do. What we are really talking about is participation I think.If we
are going to "vote" on things, then suppose we have a group like the
Snow Leopard collective, with users registrting individualy, a group
could skew the vote a particular way. What we need is an "outer
circle" in which everyone who has been here for a little while can
watch the newcomers and decide weather they have some major issue that
would exclude them. Maybe exclusion is better than inclusion as a
system - and all the oldsters will not have to deal with the issue.
>>
yuk! I find an exclusionary system far more distastful than an inclusionary system -- mostly because that's exactly how to stagnate an organization. We *need* new blood, new ideas, new members and new view-points all the time. As I see it, the main points in having a heirarchy are
James Veverka <headbands@webtv.net> writes:
<<
Like Wade, this hierarchy thing makes me uncomfortable. Although I
not
been on the list for long, I would suggest that a "virian council"
should be modeled after a scientific, rather than religious paradigm.
>>
Could you be more precise? How do typical scientific councils operate?
ERiC