It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Kryties
Schrodinger's Dog, Benevolent Heretic and Ian Maclean would be my three votes off the top of my head. I will think up other suggestions.
Originally posted by Navieko
Loam, I understand where your coming from. The problem I have with the expanding of the list is that we'd be doing so simply to involve and please some other members. Now there is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to do this, but in reality you have to ask -- will it really make a difference in the end? The likelihood is that the same top members that we have in the current list will still be elected, and in any case, whoever is nominated will surely be capable of doing the job, right?
So yes, we could wait a couple days just to please the others -- but then we could also please a lot more by making this forum a reality, a lot sooner.
It's okay to want to be involved simply for the sake of being apart of something, but when that means halting progress and making people wait, when in reality it would make no difference in the outcome.... why bother?
[edit on 27/2/09 by Navieko]
Originally posted by darcon
reply to post by americandingbat
I have to agree with you. Let the Sh#t hit the fan.
Things are set in motion, and if the people don't like the formed committee, re open the voting, or let the staff pick.
But we have already implemented, and have had the go ahead for this vote.
We cannot keep changing our minds about this.
Or we are going to Die Alone!
- Jack Shepard from LOST
Originally posted by schrodingers dog
I have tried to stay on the sidelines for most of this process, but please ...
... I beg you, please stop going around in circles.
Is this how any of us are going to behave should we be picked for this "thing?"
It's enough to let any member or staff observing this to lose total faith in our collective ability to communicate or get anything done. I am practically at the point of conceding to this reality myself.
Everyone can and should voice their opinion, just please don't do it ten times.
There was a majority vote so it went ahead - if we go back on that we will lose all credibility, and likely the process will not go forwards.
And maybe the whole idea will be scrapped due to the problems that it has caused and the ban will stand as is.
Apparently this has become a fight for democracy now more than anything. $50 says by the time we finally get over this voting thing we won't even remember what it was we're voting for.
Originally posted by Niall197
reply to post by budski
If this so called election continues to its logical conclusion I for one won't recognise its validity or the committee itself. This committee will not represent anything other than the desire of some to climb the greasy pole & of others to deny fairness to their fellow members.
This committee of the few, by the few.
Originally posted by drock905
reply to post by Springer
I applaud this decision. The topic of drugs ALWAYS devolves into a pissing contest between drug users for "bragging rights" It adds nothing to ATS and attracts a crowd that detracts from the purpose of this site.
Originally posted by Rigel
May I suggest one more time this enlightening
post by Rigel ?