paul,

what is pro mission about people on the lab, etc that don't even bother to attend by laws revision meetings, and then not being really involved in the lab except showing up for an occasional lab meeting, not representing the listeners because they don't engage them, voting in an uneducated manner and then following the lead of some of the most outspoken members of the group? i'll take my chances on new accountable people that want to be there.

this is serious:
and now you have the situation wherein the notable people (lab-expired and appointed, a couple of producers and management, and various other people attacking people, by race baiting, instead of debating their ideas), that were attending the bylaws meeting, not bothering with it at all and instead organizing in the "unity caucus", (the by invatation only meetings) and outreaching to select groups, not bringing them to the mandated bylaws meetings, but to their own proprietary meetings.

what is that all about, paul? so at least 3 lab people that will vote on the voting methods and elections process have defected to this new group. they have abandoned bylaws meetings because they have another plan. perhaps they will come in at the last minute with hoards of people to sway the situation. this is disingenuous. if i am wrong, then let's have another explanation for a shadow organization full of the key people, who are no longer attending the official meetings.

All lab members should know this is going on and ask what the hell is going on.

patty

>
>
>I think the choice is clear. Eliminate the first-year exception in
>the Spooner model to assure pro-mission Pacifica local and national
>boards so the work to restore and strengthen the mission throughout
>the network can continue.
>
>Paul Surovell
>