> That last sentence, cast in bronze. "Ours is but to choose
> individually."
> Whatever your opinion on the Dean campaign and how they interact with
> us, it's up to individuals to make their choices. This group is an
> informal association, and I don't think we're going to make a
> collective decision on whether we're "in" or "out."
> Further, I don't think we should try to tell one another where their
> participation should go. Not that anyone's tried this, but I could see
> it happening in the future. I trust in the divinity of our collective
> forward momentum.

Looks like we're in agreement once again, Josh.

The beauty as things have evolved is that there's emerged more and less "in"
components to be involved with, so something for everyone. It's my personal
opinion that it's the the persistence of both approaches, in the context of
lateral authority, that will allow for complementary as opposed to
conflictive purposes and thus overall growth. And it could conceivably
increase the chances that the project survives in the event that fickle
fortune frowns upon it's central purpose.


<--enter gratuitous quotation that implies my profundity here-->

Reply via email to