|
Grex > Agora56 > #84: Newspaper in Denmark prints cartoon pics of Mohammed | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 432 responses total. |
rcurl
|
|
response 344 of 432:
| 
Feb 20 07:15 UTC 2006 |
At least those cartoons had some relevance. If you are going to start riots
I think you should do it on logical bases.
|
bru
|
|
response 345 of 432:
|
Feb 20 13:01 UTC 2006 |
Actuallly, this is a far more dangerous situation. This is a war based on
ideologies that are totally incompatible. It has very little to do with
religion.
If Islam keeps grabbing for these flash points to ignite the faithful, this
is going to turn into a very protracted and unforgiving conflict that will
make WWII seem like a day at the beach.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 346 of 432:
|
Feb 20 13:55 UTC 2006 |
resp:344 Although, if people were to use logic- there wouldn't
necessarily BE any riots. ;)
|
happyboy
|
|
response 347 of 432:
|
Feb 20 18:05 UTC 2006 |
re345: well in that case, praise the lord that we have
he-men like you to protect us, bruse.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 348 of 432:
|
Feb 20 18:34 UTC 2006 |
Re #345: actually, these events have *everything* to do with religion, and
primarily related to the desire of the religious hierarchy to stay in
power.
It is classic for those in power to forment popular fervor in order to
hold onto or fortify their power. The Muslim heirarchy do it and so did
the Christian hierarchy for many centuries.
It was the rise of democracy that finally diluted the political power of
religious hierarchies, though even in democracies one always sees the
stirring of the existing, less powerful, religous hierarchies striving to
increase their power.
We have actually heard from some of the militant Muslim organizations how
they oppose democracy. They cast it in terms of being un-Islamic, but this
just reflects their wish to hold onto their power.
|
richard
|
|
response 349 of 432:
|
Feb 20 19:47 UTC 2006 |
re#341 Other, there wasn't a member vote on the blue ribbon thing was
there? I thought we only have member votes to amend the bylaws and
elect board members.
The decision to place the free speech blue ribbon on grex's web page
was made by the board I assume. I recall some people here weren't at
all happy with that decision, but the members didn't make it the board
did.
I am surprised that you cannot see how anyone forcing censorship-- as
these radical muslims are doing through terrorism-- should be something
we all ought to be against. I am surprised that you cannot see that
Grex has no reason to exist if it does not have fostering the ideals of
free speech as an implied part of its mission.
This is a problem Grex has now. Grex has become ingrown and closed
off, and few people seem to think, as the founders did, that Grex can
still have a greater purpose and mission. Posting those cartoons would
be using Grex, what it is and what its supposed to be about, for the
common good. It would be Grex fulfilling its mission the same as its
refusing to stop offering email simply because of spammers. If you
don't take chances, if you don't stand up for what is right, you don't
make the best case for what you are.
Nothing could speak greater for Grex, and its mission, than to offer
itself as a place where those cartoons can be posted and where no
amount of pressure can stop it.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 350 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:18 UTC 2006 |
My answer to you is the same as my suggestion to Dan Cross. If you
want Grex to take a major policy stance, put forth a proposal which
can be voted on by the membership.
|
richard
|
|
response 351 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:32 UTC 2006 |
re #350 and my answer to you mcnally is to repeat what I just said,
which is that the membership ONLY VOTES to amend the bylaws and elect
board members. There is no provision allowing the members to vote on
anything else. This therefore, just as with the blue ribbon thing,
cannot be put before the membership.
The board can decide, or staff.
|
kingjon
|
|
response 352 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:36 UTC 2006 |
item:coop,2
Bylaws Article 5, Section a: "Any member of Grex may make a motion by entering
it as the text of a discussion item in a computer conference on Grex designated
for this purpose ..." Section b: "A motion will be considered to have passed
if more votes were cast in favor than against, *except as provided for bylaw
amendments.*" [emphasis added]. Note that bylaw amendments are completely
separate from member motions.
|
richard
|
|
response 353 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:45 UTC 2006 |
re #352 my bad, but it doesn't say that a membership vote is NECESSARY
for anything other than board elections and bylaw amendments. In fact
there is nothing in there stating which other types of proposals
require member votes.
For example, staff did not recently seek a member vote to restrict
email privileges. It didn't have to. Maybe it should have. But
nothing in the bylaws specifies which types of proposals need member
votes.
I submit that I do not think that posting three cartoons on the grex
web page is such a big deal that it requires a member vote. It is
certainly not as big a deal as restricting email privs
|
richard
|
|
response 354 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:46 UTC 2006 |
And I ask mcnally and other, if the blue ribbon thing did not require a
member vote, which was grex taking a political stand, why should this?
|
kingjon
|
|
response 355 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:54 UTC 2006 |
Re #353: Article 3, Section c: "The BOD shall make decisions related to system
maintenance, staff responsibilities and appointments, and issues related to
daily business." This is none of these.
Whether to post something on the web page is (IMO) up to the webmaster, but his
decision can be made for him by a member vote.
|
richard
|
|
response 356 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:56 UTC 2006 |
I think that by placing the blue ribbon on grex's webpage without a
member vote, grex set a precedent that these decisions on matters
related to taking political stands, can be made by the board and do not
require a member vote. Which is not to say a member vote isn't a good
thing. Just that the board is authorized by the membership to make
these decisions themselves.
|
myopicislam
|
|
response 357 of 432:
|
Feb 20 21:20 UTC 2006 |
http://grex.cyberspace.org/~myopicislam/
|
mcnally
|
|
response 358 of 432:
|
Feb 20 21:28 UTC 2006 |
> And I ask mcnally and other, if the blue ribbon thing did not require a
> member vote, which was grex taking a political stand, why should this?
Because it rather undermines the claim that you are making (that Grex
supports free speech) when you haven't even asked the membership of
Grex whether it agrees with your symbolic gesture.
If no consensus was sought at the time of the blue ribbon campaign then
the same was true of that gesture, but that doesn't make it a better idea
the second time around.
|
jep
|
|
response 359 of 432:
|
Feb 20 22:36 UTC 2006 |
The Board does not have any authority to take political stands which
claim to represent my position. I don't vote for Grex Board members in
order to have someone else to make political statements for me. I do
so in order that someone will be in charge of Grex, to provide a
community forum where I can discuss things with other people who like
to discuss things.
Grex doesn't need to have an editorial voice. It's a place to express
one's editorial voice. Grex is an electronic barbershop, not a
newspaper.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 360 of 432:
|
Feb 20 23:58 UTC 2006 |
Is that the twisted analogy you used to have your items deleted?
|
jep
|
|
response 361 of 432:
|
Feb 21 00:02 UTC 2006 |
Nope. You know, you should have discussed that two years ago when it
was relevant. It's not now, or in this item.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 362 of 432:
|
Feb 21 00:24 UTC 2006 |
It was a natural question given how false your analogy was. Barbershops
don't archive the conversations that occur there.
|
jep
|
|
response 363 of 432:
|
Feb 21 00:43 UTC 2006 |
No, it was a very strained question, obviously inappropriate, obviously
discussed at extremely great length when it was meaningful two years
ago, and obviously intended as a mean spirited attack from out of the
blue. If you want to be a jerk, cyklone, at least own up to what you
are doing. Be an honest jerk.
|
naftee
|
|
response 364 of 432:
|
Feb 21 00:48 UTC 2006 |
Since the items are still (to my knowledge) available somewhere, the
discussion is as valid now as it was two years ago.
Some people don't forgive others for selfish acts, jep. you have to be
prepared to accept the consequences of your decisions years after the fact.
otherwise you're going to be calling an awful lot of people 'jerks'.
|
scholar
|
|
response 365 of 432:
|
Feb 21 01:08 UTC 2006 |
I've heard rumours that the vandalized items will be reposted someday soon.
|
twenex
|
|
response 366 of 432:
|
Feb 21 01:15 UTC 2006 |
I haven't been paying much attention to this item, but now I'd like to make
a point.
I think those of you who are panicking about "the reaction in the Muslim
world" are missing the point. Much of the Muslim world is in the THIRD World,
a region well known for revolutions, counter-revolutions, violent protests,
and a general state of anarchy, irrespective of the religion of the people
concerned. In contrast, most of the Muslims in the /developed/ world, along
with citizens professing other religions, has been calm (there was a rally
in London at which some Muslim protesters demanded the beheading of the
cartoonists, but they were almost universally condemned for this by the rest
of the British Muslim community).
|
tod
|
|
response 367 of 432:
|
Feb 21 03:13 UTC 2006 |
All I have to say is that it was the Taliban that demolished the 1500 year
old Buddhists monuments and you didn't hear a squeak from the Muslim world.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 368 of 432:
|
Feb 21 03:54 UTC 2006 |
Jep, you used twisted "logic" to justify deleting items. Now you use a twisted
analogy of barbershops and grex. If you want to define me as a "jerk" for
pointing out your continued inability to think clearly, be my guest.
|