On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Brian Harvey <[email protected]> wrote: > The quoted excerpts below are from several different people.
>> Some of the candidates have made it quite clear how they feel: ANGRY. >> I don't want an angry committee. >> Whatever happens, that won't serve anyone well but for themselves. > > I disagree with this, obviously, and disagree angrily :-) with the third > sentence, which I think insults candidates whom I respect. If the goal of the committee is to serve the community in steering the editing board; then I feel that it is a conflict of interest to have people who are very angry doing so because they are more likely to focus on their anger regarding the situation than how the community wants to move past that situation. > Sometimes anger is an appropriate feeling. Passion and vigor are different than anger. Anger results in stand-still, hurt feelings, "They don't respect me". Anger makes people resign because they are pissed. How many members of the steering committee are going to "get mad for the community" and "quit for the community"? Is that possible? > How do you feel about the state of the world economy, for example? I'm angry > about it. I feel that everything is a decision. If I choose to become a politician and change things, or to be a lobbyist, or to be a protester, or to nothing; then I will feel different things. If anything I feel sad for not taking up my civic responsibility. I don't know who I could rightly get mad at but for myself. _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
