Different methods of discussion
To the editor:
It has come to my attention there is various degrees of addressing a concern of relevance. Some prefer emotional. others rational. I find that in debate of an item or items, there are points to be made on both sides, good and bad. How we discern betwixt the two is a matter of interpretation. Right or wrong we will come to discover at our profit or peril. Those that choose to do so in a voluptuary manner have a right to the ends of their means or devices. Those who choose rationale discussion on the matters in concern time wise.
Two rooms, as finance dictates, one for Vol and one for Rad.
Rules for each.
Rad:1) No loud outburst of opinions
2) No interruptions
3) Preferably seek the source of a problem and advance a solution, effecting fundamental or revolutionary changes in current practice
4) Hand and body language to a minimum
5) Failure results in expulsion. Noise level an be monitored.
Vol Room (Preferably padded and sound proof)
1) Let one speak and proceed at one’s own discretion
2) Physical abuse or intimidation results in expulsion.
Then take recommendations from the convulsions of both and put it to a vote.
Note: Those that fail to vote in accordance to their peers, face legal expulsion and additional legal proceedings as required.
I would now take the time to express my bibs on the UEP scenario. Quality vote yes. Quantity vote no. Thank you and good-day.
Lawyers: Question: can Rads sue Vols for constitutional infringements which could then bring in meeting organizers for failure of duties to allow all to be heard?
Bernard Forand
Cape Coral