Hello Werner.

28 May 04 08:27, you wrote to Michael Grant:


WD|> Very well! Just that I want. I am very much against intrigues and
WD|> other actions in the background.

So you think his rewriting Policy is okay?  Since he violates Policy by
making "IC Interpretations" on Sections that have no room for
Interpretation (Section 7.2) is okay with you?

Because he applied an interpretation to a section of Policy that is clearly
defined, he has affectively rewritten that section of Policy.  He did so in
violation of Section 8 of Policy.

That he repeatedly "threatened" that by the end of May, you will
see how I can overule the ZCC decisions.

That he attempted to enact his Rewrites of Policy after he was removed as
IC by the ZCC who adhered to Section 7.2 and tried to make it retrocative
to nullify his own removal as IC?

That tried to use a section of Policy that he is the chair and runs
elections and counts ballots as a basis for trying to count this remval as
null and void when anyone can see that it is a clear conflict of interest
for him to attempt to do so?

This is who you support?

I am sorry but anyone that will do absolutely anything to gain all the
control over FidoNet and is willing to run roughshod over anyone that
disagrees with him (threats of removing RC's that failed to show up for the
Policy Referendum earlier in the IC echo.  Threats against Z2 RC's with his
I will not accept them discussing the proposed Policy document outside of
his sight - an echo he has no access to.  His wanting to control every
aspect of the procedure when Policy disctates that the RC's have control
and /not/ him) is not someone I would want in the ZC chair, let alone the
IC Chair.

[Ewwww, run-on sentence :)]

Has he always lorded over Z2 controlling every aspect of things?  Sure
seems that way.

Robert

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-RuneKeep