> > "The community" may not have been opposed to the action as a whole, but > the decision was discussed, made, and executed by only a few people > without the community even being told. I think it's abhorrent that a > spammer gets a post to the list explaining why we've banned his address, > whereas a long-time contributor to the community gets nothing. >
Right. How dare the people whom we voted to represent us in club-related actions do something to represent us? Let me get this straight -- the elections for UUG officers really ARE just a popularity contest? Or did we not give them the right to make these "autocratic" (as some like to call them) decisions by electing them in the first place? If you have a problem with how they handled things (oh, and I guess I'll explicitly state here that I don't care, and I don't think Mike is as concerned about it as everyone else), don't vote for them in the next election. Sorry, but there's just nothing you can do about Andrew on this one; he's not running. Oh well, you'll actually have to tell him personally. Or just flame him (and the other officers, while you're at it) on the list... --Clint -------------------- BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
