Daniel Cross said, >On Sun, August 25, 2013 1:49 pm, Daniel Cross wrote: >> Lev, you say that this will be discussed at the AGM, yet the rest of your >> email (beginning "what will change") reads as though disincorporation is a >> decided matter.
>"What will change" is always with the caveat of "if" the motion is passed. >The question mark in the title was also meant to indicate the uncertain >nature of the proposition. A comment on the above statements on this issue, now I have worked on the committees of two volunteer orginisations and __DO__ apreciate what is trying to be done to simplify matters, but on reading the whole series of messages I must say I have same ___impression___ as Daniel, that is the merger is being presented as a done deal and one simply cannot do this in a democratic group such as this. On the whole I am not a bit surprised on the groups reaction. When presenting any information that may be headed for a hostile reception it is wise to be carefull of the wording, rereading and correcting to make sure it says what you wish it to see without giving a false impression. It has taken me usually 2 to 3 __HOURS___ to formulate a 400 word post under these conditions (an undisclosed news thread) and I am proud to say, I never had a single post missinterprited. Lindsay _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
