At 5:01 PM -0400 8/22/00, Werner Reisberger is rumored to have typed:
I really don't understand this emotionally discussion. There are some simple things to decide and it shouldn't be too difficult to stay cool!?
Er...it's _not" an emotional discussion, at least on my end. You missintepret my argument style for anger or other emotion.
If Guenther don't want to decide about the lists we (the people who are willing to host them) should decide it.
I COMPLETELY disagree. (Unemotionally, that is.)
There are more open questions but we don't need to discuss everything emotionally until it dies.
See, I'm a firm believer that a group of people can _never_ react quickly enough to get anything done in this world. I believe one person _can_ make decisions rapidly enough to deal with the flow of current (and future) informaiton. So I make the case that "we" shouldn't be deciding _anything,_ and that Philip should. I realize this sounds strange in the politically-correct atmosphere of trying to make everyone happy, but it's how I feel. In those areas where I am the one in control, I listen to the input from those interested, then I make a decision and move on. I might be wrong, but I accept responsibility for it when I am and move on. In a recent example of a unilateral decision I made affecting one of my mailing lists, some people felt strongly enough to leave the lists. That's a shame, but I didn't lose any sleep over it, since both they and I did what we respectively thought to be "right." Emotional? Heck, no. Convinced that a committee can do nothing but confuse a clear-cut issue? You bet'cha. Charlie