On 20 Nov 2005 at 4:39, Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com wrote:
I wasn't talking about people doing what they believe, I was talking about refusing to consider taking on paid employee's due to philosophical or political predispositions. Its rather a non-issue however, since their doesn't seem to be any interest in the idea.
[top-posting snipped]
Since when is doing things by volunteer effort rather than by paid staff "communist" in nature? Does that make all nonprofit activities done without pay "communist"?
Those who refuse to consider the option of incentive are violently objectionable.
Jack (Sam Spade)
On 11/20/05, Daniel R. Tobias dan@tobias.name wrote:
On 20 Nov 2005 at 4:39, Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com wrote:
I wasn't talking about people doing what they believe, I was talking about refusing to consider taking on paid employee's due to philosophical or political predispositions. Its rather a non-issue however, since their doesn't seem to be any interest in the idea.
[top-posting snipped]
Since when is doing things by volunteer effort rather than by paid staff "communist" in nature? Does that make all nonprofit activities done without pay "communist"?
-- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Jack Lynch stated for the record:
Those who refuse to consider the option of incentive are violently objectionable.
Thanks for the warning that you consider violence an acceptable part of your objection. I will bear that in mind if I ever make the mistake of meeting you.
-- Sean Barrett | I lost my Internet. sean@epoptic.org | Can you send me another one?