Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 19:37:52 -0700
From: Juan Fajardo <fajardos-AT-ix.netcom.com>
Subject: M-G: Marxism-General List


I am having a hard time understanding the reasoning by which Bob Malecki
and Hugh Rodwell oppose the simple proposition that a list's members
ought to decide by simple majority what happens on the list or to it.  

However, there is a point to be made about the ineffectualness of such a
vote in this medium.  The real test will be list membership.

At the moment we have two proposals before us:

1) Apply for an account with NY Transfer/Blythe Systems to run an
M-G-type list on their server.  Sid C. has done a lot of research on
this but it is unfair to exepect him to assume all the responsibility,
or any of it, beyond that.  Others need to step forward, but not all of
us have the technical know-how, experience, or time, to do so (I don't).

2) Go with Hans E.'s offer and keep a "Marxism space" in existence that
includes an unmoderated list - and Hans has already said that the
one-post per day limit would be enlarged to two- perhaps three- per
day.  Not ideal, but better than the current limit on M-G and it has the
added benefit of avoiding the fractioning of the "Marxism space"  lists
into separate, disjointed projects. Here again, someone needs to step
forward to do the work on it.

As I said I don't have the know-how nor time to take on these projects. 
Neither precludes the other from happening, and there is no reason for
them to be "rivals". 

In fact, this is a case in point of what I meant by the real test being
list memebership. We will, in effect, vote with our "feet." I for one
plan to join either, and indeed, both, projects if they get off the
ground --and if either does not suit my needs, I'll leave it.  That's
the vote that counts.


Juan


     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---