Craig A. Johnson
On 28 Mar 96 at 19:58, Marilyn Davis <•••@••.•••> wrote:
> Craig A. Johnson <•••@••.•••> wrote:
> > To repeat, the co-leadership of Cyber Rights has made no decision to
> > undertake this "project." It seems to me it is useful to get
> I'm surprised to hear you claim this list has some official
> "leadership". I was only aware of a generous "moderator".
My apologies to the list for the confusion this comment about
"co-leaders" has generated. First, we do have an ad hoc group of
five informal co-leaders/moderators who discuss pertinent list issues. In
general, this group emerged from an official CPSR Cyber Rights
Working Group, which is generally at this point coterminous with the
My point was simply that if one has dissension among the members of
the Cyber Rights Working Group, the chances of it getting behind the
statement are nil. Of course, that doesn't preclude another ad hoc
group on the Cyber Rights *list* from sponsoring the issue.
> If CPSR undemocratically *assigns* us our leaders, where are our
This doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense. You are correct that the
mailing list is open to everyone and has no requirements. So, by all
means, do what you want. CPSR only comes into the equation if the
Working Group is asked to sponsor an initiative.
> Now then, if you, as an equal partner in our list have an objection to
> finding some sort of group consensus, please explain.
I do not see how, in a list comprised of people from all walks of
life, and representing many different and divergent political
perspectives, you can possible reach a "consensus" no matter how it
is defined. Several people have already made it blatantly clear that
they don't agree with the pricing proposal. One doesn't just consign
them in an elitist fashion to the dustbin. Their voices are every
bit as important as yours.
I not only have an objection to using this list for reaching a
"consensus"; I think it is politically impractical and naive.
> And if you have an objection to our sending out a press release when
> and if we form a consensus, please explain.
Go ahead and send out any press release you want, and feel free to
say you are a member of the Cyber Rights list, but please don't
pretend as if you have some kind of list *consensus* because you do
not. So, please don't presume to think that you can send out the
release in the name of the Cyber Rights list.
You may want to form an ad hoc group to work on this, start your own
mailing list, whatever. But just as the Cyber Rights Working Group
does not speak for the Cyber Rights mailing list, neither does your
group speak for the list.
I would have thought this obvious.
> And if you have any objections and/or improvements to the consensus
> statement so far, or if you have an alternate statement for our
> consideration, please come forward with that.
No I cannot offer any at the present time. I prefer not to be a part
of a manufactured "consensus," as you have presented it.