Ah, a voice seemingly in opposition to the apparent and recent shift
right to the more conservative side of management of The List, as
opposed to where we have been - a bit more in a Laissez Faire mode.

It bothered me a good bit with the apparent tightening up, and though I
have been on the list a good long time -though not as long as many - and
when I felt I was just being my same old self as I have always been, for
what ever reason in recent times "same-old-self" just seemed to get
cross ways more times that I like to admit. Something had changed, yet I
didn't feel it was me.

So with that bit of history, I confess to being squeamish about
tightening up the rules very much. I suppose that I like the Laissez
Faire mode  - meaning literally "let do" - let the wheel roll free and
have "the Appointed One" take a reading now and then and give the wheel
a good solid whack now and then to get it back on track.
If we must have governance, then an elected council or committee
(meaning representation for us all) should select an administrator for
the task of whacking the wheel when needed.

My $0.02 this afternoon.

John Rodgers
88 GL Driver

David Beierl wrote:
> At 03:02 PM 1/15/2009, David Kao wrote:
>> I don't have the authority but if I do your resignation is denied.
>> I hope there are many others to join me to ask you to stay and remain
>> as the moderator of this list.
>
> I've got no complaint about Jim's moderating as such, and I'd be just
> as happy if he stayed on at the job -- if he wants to.  I *do* have
> strong reservations about the *new and very different* charter which
> suddenly appeared, and I have to say that much as I would hate to
> leave I might have some trouble staying on the list if it remains
> unchanged.  But voting with our feet is our prerogative, as much as
> imposing drastic policy changes is the moderator's.  Unless, as Jim
> has suggested, this particular list belongs to the members and not to
> the moderator.  In that case I think he is bound in some sense to
> consult with the members at large before imposing such a drastic
> change in tone, if not in content.
>
> But I cringe at the idea of dragooning the poor guy to go back to it
> when he so very clearly has gotten sick of it.  I don't think it
> would be good for the list, and I'm quite sure it would be a bad
> thing for Jim himself.
>
> Regards,
> David
>
>
> --
> David Beierl - Providence RI USA --
> http://pws.prserv.net/synergy/Vanagon/
> '84 Westy "Dutiful Passage," '85 GL "Poor Relation"
>
>