On Wed, 16 Jan 2002 03:18:28 -0500, Joe Childs <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Bob wrote:
>
><much snippage>
>
>>For Jeff's sake, and the sake of all those who took refuge from
>>Scuba-L to Scuba-SE, I think it's high time that SOMEONE who is
>>a member on both lists bring up the idea of a DEMOCRATIC ELECTION
>>PROCESS to elect a fair and able Owner, for all to be able to return
>>back to the one single list.
>
>As a subscriber/lurker, who has quit *neither* of the lists...........

Nor contributed.

>I'll make this short and sweet.

I'll make this neither short nor sweet, but tell it like it is, as is
my style!

For lack of time I will not continue to "argue" with anyone because I
have already stated my case and responded to your objections.  The
rest is up to the members to whom I addressed my proposal.  I am NOT
running for the post.  I am just a disinterested party VERY MUCH
interested in the affairs of the lists being run democratically as
all LISTSERVs are supposed to be run.


>
>1.) Scuba-SE ain't broke. There's plenty of (free) server space, and the
>listserv software (which is expensive) is already there,running just fine.

You missed the points I made to make the proposal, in particular, "-L"
vs "-SE".  "SE" was never meant to be on subjects outside of South-East
USA, nor participated by a world-wide contributor.

>
>B.) A while back, a bunch of people got upset with stuff that was going on
>in Scuba-L.

Are you anti-DEMOCRACY and pro-CENSORSHIP too, like Nick?

The words "censorship", "tyranny", and "dictatorship" are allowed here.

>They decided to leave. They are now on this list. That is
>history. It's over. Done. There is no GOOD reason to "unify" the two lists.

One GOOD reason is that MOST of the contributors in Scuba-SE are here
for the reasons you censored, and MANY of them are already on both lists.
But SOME of us would not return to a list run by an Owner who does not
abide by the wishes of the VAST MAJORITY of those who voted, when he
was the one who supported calling for the votes!

>(FYI-The last Scuba-L post archived on google.com is pre-Nedfest99)

Could it be because that's when the current Scuba-L LISTSERV archives
were truncated?  (April 99).  That's precisely where google.com fill
the existing vacuum in Scuba-L, as an archive site of Scuba-L.



>4.) Chuck's a computer guy. He knows how this stuff works and he,(like
>Russ) is impartial. I nominate Chuck Hopf fer permanent.

There is absolutely no censorship in nominations in a democratic
process.  I may even nominate Nick, if nobody else does, just to show
that he is NOT excluded from consideration.  It's the VOTING RESULT
that counts, Joe.

While Chuck may be impartial, like Russ, Chuck was the strongest
supporter of Nick's censorship.  It's IN THE ARCHIVES!!!  Russ is as
much against censorship as those who would not return to Scuba-L or
any other list run by a dictatorial censor like Nick.

I support Chuck 100% in his role of a temporary "fill in for Jeff",
and has so stated.

But I will not support Chuck for his belief and support of censorship.


>OR,AND,BUT
>
>3.) Jeff's boss said -"If you .....want to volunteer to share list owner
>responsibilities..."  How about two or three Co-Owners ? Hell, sign me up
>and we'll change the name to Scuba-TX
>
>
>-Joe

Are you nominating yourself?   Another Texan by the name of Chuck has
already tried to start a group to take the traffic away from Scuba-SE
when the disk space problem at UTC surfaced.  Where is that group NOW?

What do you mean "we'll change the name"?  Don't you mean that IF you
were elected to be Owner, you'll bypass any democratic process in
anything you do, "just like Nick"?

-- Bob.