At 19:08 +0000 5/12/08, Thomas Dalton wrote: >2008/12/5 Gordon Joly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> At 11:35 +0000 4/12/08, Thomas Dalton wrote: >>> > I am sure there is some guesswork here. >>>> >>>> And yes, I agree, WMUK must be democratic. I am trying to suggest >>>> that making every "supporting member" become a guarantor member (or >>>> become nothing) might not be the best way forward. >>> >>>No-one has disagreed with that. What you're suggesting is *forcing* >>>certain people not to become guarantor members. That is the part that >>>is undemocratic. >>> >> >> I like the idea of forcing somebody *not* to do something! > >You know perfectly well what I mean. Why don't you just explain why >you think limiting the numbers of guarantor members is a good thing? >
I have tried. And at least one counter example has been given and that example showed was that the membership engaged in many different ways. Gordo -- "Think Feynman"///////// http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
