[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Membership] Missing the point to hit a straw man?

Elliot Nesterman wrote:

        Eric Weisberg wrote:

     > No.  We want democratic voting reflecting the will of diverse
     > minorities.  The resulting board will reflect the will of the majority.

     I always wonder, in these discussions, how small a minority needs
     to be before it loses its credibility when claiming oppression by the

I do not understand how your comment relates to my point.  I was not
claiming "oppression," so the "credibility" of such claims can't be at issue.  Nor, am I complaining about the "majority."  Rather, I was
discussing how to form it.

However, I should have referred to "interests" rather than "minorities" in my

>         With only 9 members to elect it may be difficult to get a
>         director for each interest.

So, you support maximizing the number of interests
which may be represented by the 9 at large directors?

>         And some of those, arguably minority, interests
>         can be very vocal (Thinly veiled reference ;-)).

Thinly veiled, but still obtuse.  I am not sure of your reference
nor your point.  Are you saying that:

*I am complaining of oppression,
*am part of an extremely vocal minority, and
*that "being vocal" (giving voice to one's thoughts) is inappropriate?

If I have correctly deduced your meaning, what is the proper response?

Frankly, I doubt I am in a minority regarding the very limited issues about which I speak.  Since the values I espouse are fairness for all
protection from capture (and consequential "oppression?") by the few,
I can't be too far out of the main stream in my objectives.   We can examine how I would accomplish those objectives in other posts.  And, I
will appreciate your comments, particularly if critical.

To the extent you imply that "vocal minorities" (or individuals) are
inappropriate, I suggest you are skating on thin ice and should
limit your comments to the merits of my (and other posters')
positions.  Ad homonym remarks should be avoided.