it must choose specific programs that
are inherently at risk of being controversial. So to set a standard of
universal contentment as the benchmark for any non-profit's legitimacy is
absurd, an impossible test to meet.
"Universal contentment...absurd."
Neither Ray nor any one else has said anything like this nonsense. You
consistently try to pin some absurd motive, theory or statement to the
targets of your bullying. Then, you launch into an equally bizarre tirade as
some proof that the target is some complete idiot while your superior
assessment is self-evident because only you can properly weigh all issues.
Any one can ask themselves, when did Ray or anyone but Tony say anything
about "universal comtentment?"
Someone once made a one-word response to one of your posts, "idiocy"
I need to thank you, Tony, for your bizarre and outrageous, Evil Ray,
series. I've often made the assertion that as undisputed leader of FOCP
since 2003, you have abused your power over my membership with FOCP. Your
style of writing in the Evil Ray series helps support the assertions I've
made with specific occurrences or interactions with FOCP.
People might think, maybe Glenn was telling the truth about his problems
with this character behind closed doors? If he acts like this on a public
list, how will he use his power as gang leader behind the secrecy of gang
processes?
You show a relentless effort to abuse your targets. Like with me, you could
never beat me in any open debate with this type of bullshit so your lack of
self-control became an abuse of power to silence me.
You think you intimidate people into silence with this style of fallacious
argument. Actually, folks like you probably intimidate more casual listserv
subscribers because they don't want to find themselves a target of this type
of shit for simply expressing their opinions. Sure, I'm pretty critical of
characters like you. But I think others have asked you, what did Ray ever do
to you to deserve the evil Ray series and this type of trickery?
Isn't it interesting at the number of list post "criticizers" whom never
point out Tony's abusive, Evil Ray, posts?
An ex-member of FOCP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <UnivCity@list.purple.com>
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 2:48 AM
Subject: Re: [UC] The UCD answer
A non-profit running an adult literacy program is comparable to a
non-profit running a Business Improvement District. In order to undertake
any activity in the public sphere at all -- and worthy activity in the
public sphere is the chief function of any 501(c)(3) -- it must choose
specific programs that are inherently at risk of being controversial. So to
set a standard of universal contentment as the benchmark for any
non-profit's legitimacy is absurd, an impossible test to meet.
One problem not only Ray, but also others on list at times fall prey to,
is the habit of treating UCD as if it were sui generis, a thing of a kind.
In truth, it falls into various classes of agent, all of which have
existing rules and regulators. You may or may not be satisfied by these
rules and regulators. If you don't like them, let's put some thought into
how they might be revised. That's the only useful direction I see for this
thread, and the laudable purpose for which Ray started it. If it's just to
be another naughty-naughty-UCD list ... yawn ... goodness, what time is it
... g'night, all....
-- Tony West
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
idea: ucd should remain scrupulously neutral in public
questions/disputes/contests, not taking sides or
even appearing to take sides.
A good precept politically, perhaps, but an impossible for any agency
to carry out operationally in any walk of life. To follow your
reasoning strictly, an adult-literacy program that choose to employ
Curriculum A should refrain from taking any action as long as there
were public advocates of Curriculum B. It would be better, you are in
effect proposing, for there to be no literacy programs at all, than
controversial literacy programs.
That's not what his reasoning says at all. He's saying that the adult-
literacy program should choose the Curriculum without input from UCD.
Frank
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database:
269.8.4/825 - Release Date: 5/30/2007 3:03 PM
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
