Re: SUO: SUMO / IFF

[Robert Grayson Spillers <skydog@postoffice.pacbell.net>]

Gee Chris, I am so glad that you oppose mud-slinging.  

Of course "sarcastic, innuendo-laden personal attacks" that are "distasteful
and inappropriate" suggesting a "hidden agenda" and relying on "ad hominem
mud-slinging"  are considered and temperate judgments that "stick to the
issues".  

Pardon me while I wipe off enough mud to be able to point out what I think
it was intended to obscure:

(1) Teknowledge's desire to gain and maintain a privileged status  vis-a-vis
other contributors. 

(2)  Their view that opposition is obstruction and those opposed should  leave 
  

Do you find it "ad hominem mud-slinging" if one frequently and forcefully
suggests that I only wish to obstruct the process of creating a greater and
more glorious SUMO and that I (and those weak minded enough to also oppose
it) should leave the SUO?  I missed that note - probably because of a problem
with my email delivery.

Bob



Chris Menzel wrote:
> 200108292121.f7TLL2f31562@philebus.tamu.edu">
> Bob Spillers wrote:
> > Regarding the IFF vote.
> >
> > I urge all of the members to vote NO.  
> >
> > Some of you may wish to vote YES because you do not wish the SUMO to 
> > have a position of privilege and think it is wise to vote for the IFF so 
> > there will be at least one other document in the same status..  I 
> > believe the SUMO vote will fail.  Jim has delayed the vote on the SUMO 
> > appeal long enough that it cannot occur before the IFF vote.
> >
> > If the SUMO vote ultimately succeeds, I will join others in proposing 
> > the IFF for the same status.  We have seen some of the results of Adam's 
> > stewardship of the SUMO.  I don't wish to see more.
> >     
>
> Bob, 
>
> I acknowledge and respect your right to push hard on procedural issues and
> to aggressively argue your views on SUMO, IFF, document standardization,
> etc.  But I find your often sarcastic, innuendo-laden personal attacks
> unwarranted, distasteful, and inappropriate in this forum. Moreover, your
> attacks suggest either a hidden agenda or a lack of conviction about the
> force of your own arguments.  Either way, please stick to the issues.   If
> you're right about SUMO, SUO participants will be smart enough to figure
> it out on their own without the benefit of your ad hominem mud-slinging.
>
> -chris
>
>
>
>