[17941] in APO-L
Re: Open Membership Apology
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William B. Rugh)
Fri Dec 12 20:16:54 1997
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 20:02:01 -0500
Reply-To: "William B. Rugh" <wbrugh@BRIGHT.NET>
From: "William B. Rugh" <wbrugh@BRIGHT.NET>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
-----Original Message-----
From: Cindy Strawbridge [SMTP:CSTRAWBRIDGE@YSI.COM]
Sent: Thursday, 11 December, 1997 15:38
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L
Subject: Re: Open Membership Apology
Don't we have a parliamentarian (interpreter of the by-laws, articles
of association, etc...) that can settle this for us? As much as I like
seeing this discussion that is seemingly going nowhere (just a little
less than I like the toast song debate), I think that it could be easily
resolved by the someone granted the authority to interpret them.
Also, let's please try to refrain from telling each other that we are
WRONG. This is supposed to be a business DISCUSSION list, not an
ACCUSATION list. We are all brothers... I know that the Boy Scout Law
was a footnote in the pledge manual for a while, we needn't let it be
a footnote in our attitude to each other.
Cindy Strawbridge
"If you aren't part of the solution,
you're part of the precipitate."
-Steven Wright
Usually these kinds of issues are settled in courts. I think we should
accept that the policy was set by a National Conention. Those who feel it
is wro should then make a proposal to change that policy.
Bill Rugh
