From: Blunderov (squooker@mweb.co.za)
Date: Tue Aug 05 2003 - 16:25:17 MDT
Many parliaments have the institution of "Speaker" who enforces the
rules of parliamentary debate. Members who transgress are expelled from
the chamber if they refuse to withdraw any remark, or behave in a
manner, that is considered "unparliamentary". (The speaker also has the
power to demand an apology.)
Could we have a system like this? If a member of the CoV transgressed
the agreed rules he/she could be suspended from posting for a certain
time.
Of course the rules * would have to be very clear. The task of 'Speaker'
could be rotated, perhaps randomly. There might have to be an appeal
mechanism.
Quite possibly this has all been tried before and failed, but just in
case it hasn't...
Best regards
Blunderov
* Speaking for myself, a rule that would like to see implemented is a
reasonable(?)ceiling on "cut and paste" posting. I would expect to see a
lot more original thinking and writing from such an intelligent group of
people than is sometimes the case. I don't think that there should be
any limit placed on citing links in support of an argument.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf
Of Kharin
Sent: 05 August 2003 09:50 PM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
[Blun.] <snip>
It would be of great assistance, if those explicitly opposed to the idea
of schism, could elaborate some proposals that would permit the Cov to
maintain diversity within its stated framework but to remain
co-operative and amicable in character (one possibility might be split
forums on a single bbs dedicated to differing political persuasions.)
Proposals along the lines of 'Hermit should jump under a bus' will not
be regarded as being constructive.
[Blun.] </snip>
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 05 2003 - 16:26:01 MDT