Re: OWNERSHIP: Ownership Moderator

["William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>]

That's all well and fine, Jack, but what
Kurland/Shakespeare/Reiners et al. really want to
do--as should be obvious--is establish a Holy
Inquisition to enforce the Gospel According to Kelso,
as they alone interpret it, where criticism of the
pinheaded cult's High Priests is a capital offense. 
Offending epistles are to be redacted into
non-existence, never to be mentioned again.

As experimental evidence, we already have the fine
example of a COG list that is moderated, Monetary
Reform, with Rodney Shakespeare as designated
Inquisitor, that hasn't had a message posted since
October 31, 2004, by Shakespeare himself, and before
that, May 16, 2004, nearly six months earlier.  A
closed group of True Believers have very little to
discuss between themselves; such is the nature of True
Belief.

I think it is significant that Shakespeare's moribund
list has the familiar cast of characters as
subscribers, who we see actually posting here in
coordinated outrage.

Conspiracy to suppress dissent through intimidation of
the COG administration, and erase it from the record,
is not too strong a word to use in this context.

Should I say, it is Satanic?
-



--- Jock Coats
<jock.coats@oxfordshirecommunitylandtrusts.org.uk>
wrote:

> May I make a comment/suggestion, as one who has been
> on here for months 
> wondering much of the time whether I should just cut
> and run because of 
> apparently frequent bouts of flame wars?
> 
> I realise I don't come from the Land of the First
> Amendment, but as a 
> liberal, in the proper, non-US sense, I believe that
> freedom has two 
> sides to it - freedom from something and freedom to
> do something.  And 
> whilst the freedom to exercise your free speech is
> widely practiced, it 
> seems in forums like this rarely to take account of
> the rest of our 
> rights to freedom from arbitrary attack.
> 
> I am on other forums where the moderator does not in
> fact have to do a 
> great deal, does not have to read everything that
> passes onto the 
> forum, unless there are complaints about it.  A
> clear set of posting 
> guidelines together with a clear procedure on which
> people can call if 
> those guidelines are breached seems to work quite
> well.
> 
> Penalties include warnings as to future conduct,
> perhaps just even 
> reminders that something might be a problem, through
> to a few days' 
> suspension of posting ability and finally to banning
> from the forum, 
> temporarily or permanently.
> 
> The guidelines also help to keep people focussed. 
> Decisions are 
> announced publicly so that people are aware that
> it's happening and by 
> and large people get on reasonably well as a result.
> 
> Jock
> 
> On 10 Jul 2005, at 14:47, Adavans@aol.com wrote:
> 
> >
> > Y'all!
> >  
> > After agonizing a bit about the need for some 
> kind of referee for 
> > this list I've decided that I'm probably not the
> right person for that 
> > role, if for no other reason than not having
> enough time to give it 
> > the attention that it needs. I check my messages 2
> to 3 times a day, 
> > and so I thought that I could probably add 5 to 10
> minutes each time 
> > to attend to moderator duties. After seeing
> certain of  yesturday's 
> > back and forth exchanges and imagining myself
> being a moderator having 
> > to tell two aggressive antagonists to give each
> other a small break 
> > and stop slinging the words "libel" and "slander"
> around...and then 
> > getting caught in the middle of it...and what if
> it 
> > escalates...well...you get the picture.
> >  
> > That being said, I've got my two cents to throw
> into the mix.  I 
> > challenge Norm Kurland and William Bedford Ryan to
> conduct a civil 
> > debate over the next month concerning the merits
> of social credit and 
> > BE. Both sides should refrain from impugning the
> character and motives 
> > of the other and otherwise refrain from any
> personal attacks or any 
> > insinuations that the other partner in the debate
> is dishonest or 
> > unprincipled, brainwashed, gullible or
> unintelligent. I see both 
> > Kurland and Ryan as being both principled and
> honest. Ryan has been a 
> > great resource for steadily increasing the  amount
> of social credit 
> > writings that can be found in one place, and he
> has a gift for tightly 
> > defining his subject.  I used to live in Alberta,
> and I didn't know a 
> > darn thing about social credit until years after I
> left. I have both 
> > Bill Ryan and Dan Parker to thank for
> initially stirring up some 
> > curiousity to explore Social Credit. Kurland has
> used his energies to 
> > systematically connect the many dots along a path
> to universal capital 
> > ownership, and I regard many of his proposals to
> have great merit. 
> >  
> > This list could be a tremendous resource if only
> the bickering could 
> > stop. How sad it is to see the folks that left
> this list years ago 
> > continue to stay away. Gee, how long has it been
> since you've all seen 
> > Ellerman post here? 
> >  
> > Regards
> > Alan Avans
> > Prairie Village KS 
> --
> J1e Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom
> T: +44 1865 485019 F: +44 845 1275714 M: +44 7769
> 695767
> 


                
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions – no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
To subscribe to this or another of COG's discussion groups register at:
http://cog.kent.edu/register.html
To unsubscribe from this group send a message to majordomo@cog.kent.edu
with a single line in the body of the message that says:
unsubscribe ownership