Text 28927, 118 rader
Skriven 2012-05-23 17:47:39 av Lee Lofaso (2:203/2)
  Kommentar till text 28866 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Janis defintions...
===========================
Hello Mark,

 ml>> ... where does it say that any discussion with
 ml>> anyone other than RCs is required??

 WD>> You are correct.

 ml> thank you...

 WD>> I'm surprised a bit that dialogue with different partners, or an
 WD>> extended set, would be an issue for you.

ML>it is not an issue for me... at least when it is done at the proper
ML>time and place...

Let's take a look_see...

ML>ie:
ML>1. a group prepares a new policy document.

What "group" might that be?  The so-called NAB?
Why should that particular "group" have any more
say than any other "group"?

ML>2. this policy document is presented to the IC to call the
ML>   RCs together to consider it.

Who claims to be the so-called "IC"?  Who recognizes this apparently
self-proclaimed "IC" as being legitimate?  Do all of the RCs recognize
this so-called "IC" as having any legitimate authority?  Do any of the
RCs recognize this so-called "IC" as having any legimitage authority?
If so, who might those RCs be?

ML>3. the RCs gain access to the document and perform their
ML>   considerations and discussions among themselves.

Which "RCs" might that be?  All of them?  A handful of them?
Please tell.  And be specific.  And then qualify your statement
as to why some RCs should have access and others not.  Along
with why RCs should be allowed to consider and discuss things
in private, as doing so would mean the ability to make "backroom"
deals without anybody else even knowing about it.

ML>4. if the RCs have decided that the document should be
ML>   presented to the network, they tell the IC this.

A small handful of RCs meeting in secret, telling a fictional IC
(as if to gain "his/her" approval) about a document they want to
present to the network sounds like a conspiracy to me.

ML>5. if the IC has been told by the RCs that they want the
ML>   document presented to the network, the IC does so.

Who might that "IC" be?  Who recognizes this so-called "IC"
of yours?  An IC that nobody knows about being told by RCs
who are not named to present a document nobody else has ever
seen is supposed to be legitimate???

ML>6. the network considers the document and decides if it is
ML>   to be put in place as the new policy document for the
ML>   network.

What "network" might that be?  The "network" within zone 1,
as put together by the Ice Queen (fictional IC) and her cohorts?
A "new policy document" written by her handpicked RCs to present
to her for approval by her underlings?

ML>7. if the network has decided to put the document in place
ML>   as the new network policy, the IC then does this.

Translation:  "If the Ice Queen's underlings have decided to
put the document prepared by the NAB as the new network policy,
the Ice Queen then does this."

ML>no where is anything said about the IC and/or ZCs having any
MLdiscussions about the document before it is presented to the RCs.

Oh, no.  Can't have that.

ML>>no where is anything said about the IC and/or the ZCs discussing
ML>the document before the RCs have finished their consideration of the
ML>document.

Oh, no.  Can't have that.

ML>no where is anything said about anyone other than the RCs having the
ML>first consideration of the document.

Oh, no.  Can't have that.

ML>it is all very simple and straight forward...

Of course.  That is the only way.

ML>it is those playing political games that convolute things...

A coup d'etat could never be more simple...

 WD>> After all, aren't you one of those who accuse me of dictatorial
 WD>> approaches?

ML>in those cases where it has been seen like that, yes...

Charlie Chaplin was also accused of being a dictator...

 WD>> Now you can't be a dictator and someone who promotes a broad
 WD>> dialogue and consensus all the same time, can you?

ML>that depends on the circumstances...

There is a difference between being a Dictator and being a King.
While only one man (or woman) can be a Dictator, every man can be
a King.  At least according to Huey P. Long.

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb
 * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)