Tony, I figure you have volunteered substantial time for the benefit of the community.? This is an admirable quality for which the community should be extremely appreciative.? UC is as special as it is in large part because of the high level of neighbor involvement.? Barry Grossbach and the Spruce Hill Committee members have also contributed enormously to the neighborhood.
But you seem to be demanding a couple of things from others who want to participate in a neighborhood discussion; first, you seem to want to?require that the speaker(s) have contributed?time or money or more to the discussion before their voice should be heard.? The speaker cannot just be a neighbor/resident.? This reasoning, taken to the larger degree, is like allowing?only those to vote who?own land.? Our country got away from that principle quickly, because of the unfairness behind the rule.? In your?demand for?people to serve on committees before they can voice an opinion, where do you start drawing lines about who volunteered enough?? If you bring one bagel,?did you qualify to participate?? Shouldn't you start giving people more than one vote or more time because they actually chaired the meeting?? Should Barry Grossbach have spoken for ten men because he organized the meeting?? I can go on with absurd examples, but the underlying problem with your demand?- that your op! inion only has value if you back it up with volunteer time - sets up a situation where peoples' votes or opinions?are given values as opposed to everyone having equal values.??Over time, ANY attempt to differentiate between the value of anyone's opinion has proven to be?a flawed system. In addition, I think that, although your demand for community involvement is an honorable one, it has the equation backwards--? the community exists first.? The neighbors gather and create "Community Associations" complete with committees and Boards.? You can't be exorcized from the?Community/Neighborhood for not being on?a Committee.? In fact you can't EVER be exorcized from the?Community.....? you're sort of born into it, like family. The second thing that you seem to be demanding before anyone should be allowed to participate is the more frightening one to me--? it is that you seem to demand that the speaker expose?their private life before they can speak.??Tony, I again say that you?mean well with your demands, but?this particular demand,?specifically your demand of Frank that he start exposing--where he lives and what he does for a living and other personal information?-- that is particularly chilling.? By expressing myself here and telling you that I disagree with you, do I have to tell you facts about myself to have this opinion?? I can promise you, your requests/demands of Frank made me think twice about writing this post or any post.??(Frankly, on a national scale an argument could be made that all the good candidates are dropping out because of the new high level of private exposure required). When you started asking/demanding of Frank all of his personal info, I couldn't help but be reminded of both the Clinton and Bush camps approach to handling tough situations--if they can't argue the problem away then they?start revealing personal information about the speaker and destroying them on a personal level so that the difficult?message gets totally lost.? Bill Clinton got accused of improper sexual advances towards a co-worker and suddenly all we heard about was how she was a tramp and a trollop until she wandered away dazed.? It certainly established an impressive bar to jump over for any future woman that wanted to come forward about Bill's behavior.? The same could be said about Bush's handling of a campaign issue--? his un-distinguished war record vs that of his opponent, a decorated war hero--? the Bushes went straight for the personal attacks and by the election, his opponent was running AWAY from the issue of who had the better war record!? I feel anyone shou! ld be allowed to speak about any issue.....No barriers to entry and no demands for personal information.? Let the facts speak for themselves. Guy Laren -----Original Message----- From: Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: purple listserv <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:13 pm Subject: Re: [UC] Re: Do we hear one another? Baloney, Maggie.? ? Every community meeting is created by an organized body. All meetings have costs; none are free.? ? Every resident should have an equal voice at community meetings -- provided they have paid their share of the cost of the meeting. If I order bagels, doughnuts and coffee for 30, someone must pay that cost. If I arrange a meeting space for 30, someone must pay. These are commonsense factors we all understand. In practice, only an organized body of some sort can perform these essential functions. Tyrannical forces spread propaganda against basic community democratic organizations. Some of these organizations are better than others.? ? But the bottom line is tresidents who create the community meetings you're talking about, have an inherent right and responsibility to organize and direct public meetings that facilitate the input of freeloaders. Period. Community meetings are never really free; and organized community meetings that deliver results usually require sophisticated leadership.? ? -- Tony West? ? > Every resident should have an equal voice at community meetings. Period.? > Meaggie? ? ----? 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>.? ________________________________________________________________________ More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com
