--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Steve Whittle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As a member of the List Committee, can I offer a few entirely > personal observations on the process.
As far as I'm concerned, Ed has broken no list rules by his Giggs comment but the Board has yielded to a vociferous half dozen who are clearly out to get him. I grope for an analogy. It's like a gay bloke who gets beaten up by a bunch of homophobic yobs every time he walks down the street. Along come the cops (the Board), who promptly arrest the gay bloke for inciting the mob. It will certainly reduce crime on the street but something ain't right. You say that "it can be hard to gauge what the line is between fair and offensive comment on the list...". Really? I should have thought that telling someone explicitly to "fuck off" or "get a lobotomy" were pretty clear-cut cases of offensive comment. Look back over the past six months and you'll find plenty of similar examples, and plenty of worse ones. For just a small handful of people, it's not about defending Manchester United; it's about getting Ed. Perhaps if the Board had acted early enough against those who clearly get a kick out of giving someone a kicking, things might not have got quite so out of hand. To Ed's credit, I don't recall his ever returning personal abuse with more of the same. You say you have tried counseling and mediation with Ed; have you tried it with those who dish out the personal abuse as well? If not, why not? I'm also concerned about the timing of the suspension. But as this involves certain off-list activity, I'll leave it at that (cryptically) but may take it up with the Board off-list. Some form of committee is clearly necessary but as few would be willing to serve on it, I don't imagine that its "undemocratic nature" is all that important in people's minds. What does concern me, though, in this particular case, is that the chairman of the Board has also voluntarily involved himself in Ed-abuse. It seems a little odd to me that any system of justice, be it ever so humble, would allow a Prosecutor to also act as one of the Judges. Frankly, I also find Ed tiresome. I can't stand his negativity, and his way of expressing a point can be irritating. If he left for good, I wouldn't miss anything. But I find the personal abuse his comments attract ten times worse than any ill-judged comment from Ed himself. Ed's postings can be conveniently ignored; the personal abuse from his half dozen tormentors is too numerous to ignore and these are, if anything, the main reason why the list has rapidly deteriorated. Everybody apart from the same half dozen wants to read about Manchester United, not about Ed, but they aren't being allowed to. The fact of suspension is, as you say, trivial but the principle of it isn't: he's been suspended simply because a small handful of individuals aren't mature enough to control their own responses and THEY (not Ed) are ruining it for everybody else. It's been heartening to see some people in the past few days question the way the matter has been handled. Whether anybody will learn anything from it after Ed returns (if he does) remains to be seen. Terry ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/GtUolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Subscription info WWW http://red11.org/list Reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] = subscribe to the list. [EMAIL PROTECTED] = unsubscribe from the list. Post message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
