[Foundation-l] Growth vs. maintenance

[Andre Engels]

On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:05 AM, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com> wrote:

> We need, as does every voluntary society, the involvement of many
> ordinary members in  each aspect of the government of the society.  We
> need, thus, the influence of community opinion--expressed opinion,
> expressed without fear of rejection for not following the established
> forms.
>
> To the extent that we have special cadres, they will be
> self-perpetuating and excluding. To maintain coherence, we   need a
> limitation in the numbers of people able to take the final action--as
> admins or arbs do--but not in the numbers of people who participate in
> making the decision.

I'm sorry, but if that's where you agree with me, you _have_
misunderstood me. I stand for exactly the opposite. I think it is a
terrible waste of energy to get the community involved in each and
every blocking decision. To form  a good opinion about a block will
often cost considerable time (an hour or so) of reading in on the
conflict. Because of that I don _not_ want each and every person doing
that on each and every block. Instead, we appoint a few people that we
trust to do this reading and decision-making in our place - read: the
arbcom.

-- 
André Engels, andreengels at gmail.com