| |
In lugnet.org.us, Matthew Miller writes:
> Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > I would encourage you to consider the things I've said in other posts, and
> > > the points made in the FAQ on the web site.
> > Ok, let's consider them then:
>
> I did ask for consideration of the FAQ *and* my posts. You're not doing
> that.
>
>
> > I'd also point out that those of us who are not NELUG members are perhaps
> > being antagonistic because we see you taking a ridiculous stand. What is
> > interesting is that not only are you so far the only NELUG member to be
> > speaking in favor of the rule, you are the ONLY Lugnetter speaking in favor.
>
> I assure you that I wouldn't be going to such lengths to discuss this
> decision if it were a solitary opinion of my own. I try to be a reasonable
> person. However, as I seem to be the only group member around, I felt it
> somewhat my duty to attempt to explain the policy of the group, especially
> in the face of being called "ridiculous" (as if that name calling justifies
> anything!).
Well, the FAQ is the only "policy" of the group that I see. Other than that, I
see a single member of the organization sharing his views, which may or may
not be those of the rest of the organization.
I did notice that I didn't comment on a couple of the other items which
addressed the age issue, so here are comments on those:
] What defines an adult?
]
] Currently, we are asking for members 18 and up.
Can't argue with that one. That's a standard interpretation of "adult"
] Can minors attend with a parent/guardian?
]
] Sorry but no. The primary reason for this is that for most of our meeting we
] just sit around talking. Our feeling is that this would be both boring for
] the minor attending and for the parent/guardian in attendance. Even if the
] minor is interested in the discussion we really don't want "board out of
] their skull" parents sitting off in the corner wishing they could leave.
Well, I doubt the discussion would be boring to Shiri. Your FAQ doesn't
address the issue of minors attending with permission of their parents
(certified by a waiver if necessary). Shiri's parents probably would be bored,
but then, that wouldn't be your concern unless they would disrupt the meeting
because of their boredom.
I think I've addressed the points you've raised, but perhaps I've missed
something. If there is a point of yours you feel I've missed, feel free to
point it out.
Frank
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) You could argue for 21(voting), 16(age of consent/age you can marry) or any myriad of ages around the world where people are subject to laws. (...) let's hope they're taking about Lego or maybe it's adult talk ! (...) Hey Frank, why don't we (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) I did ask for consideration of the FAQ *and* my posts. You're not doing that. (...) I assure you that I wouldn't be going to such lengths to discuss this decision if it were a solitary opinion of my own. I try to be a reasonable person. (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
258 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
