Anthony West wrote:
In all fairness, to distinguish UCD from us implies that UCD is not a
part of us. If by "us" you mean "readers of this listserve," then a few
days ago you noted some UCD workers are part of us. Surely that's not
what you're wishing to say now, though.
So define an "us" that is not UCD, that UCD can respond to, especially
if that "us" assumes some financial responsibility for UCD.
I can think of possible "usses", but I won't name them, no matter how
theoretically, because I don't want the heat. That's why I invited you
to do the initial round of naming, Ray.
If no one steps forward to define such an "us" for us, then, sadly, I
don't see how it can ever proceed to Points 2, 3 ... x. Who will bell
the cat? as the old fable goes. In that case, this attractive inquiry
would be better set aside, I fear.
earlier today, sharrieff stepped forward and offered one
definition of 'us':
UCD management is accountable to it's Board of Directors.
UCD management by mission is accountable in part to those it
services through geographic boundaries, it's relationships of
support (which would include ALL the local politicians), and
individuals who donate money to supplement the on-going
institutional support.
UCD management is accountable in part to the State of Pennsylvania
based on it's 501-C3 status.
If sustained funding were to happen through a local assessment,
then, in that case the UCD management would be accountable to
the public interest based on that assessment and still would be
accountable to a Board of Directors representative of that interest.
anyone care to take it from there?
and let's calm down about taking the heat. this is an open
conversation, remember, not an argument.
..................
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
[catching up...]
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
