What's really sad is when individuals take things that are issues and try to spin them around into "personality-based" discussions, effectively silencing individuals' concerns. People are entitled to discourse even when it does not align with the majority's view or agenda. Isn't this the point of Green Party?? I had raised an issue regarding issues which came up over the last SGA voting period. These issues directly deal w/ our pillar of Democracy and our Key Value of Decentralization. Our internal elections should not exclude individuals outside the centralized majority of the GPCA; the processes should have democratic integrity. "Good faith disagreement over issues and ideas should be honored as an expected part this process, and not considered a disruption or impediment." http://www.cagreens.org/it-protocol/email-decorum -N On Jan 31, 2018 4:09 AM, "J HALL" <shallow60@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Good to know. This entire conversation is sad and embarrassing for a new member. It feels like trolls are trying to destroy the party.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:51 PM, Eric Brooks <brookse32@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Since we have recently been getting into an email conversation with some disagreement between commenters, I want to take a moment to remind all of the members of the GPCA-Votes list of the GPCA Email Rules of Decorum, which can be found at the following link:
http://www.cagreens.org/it-protocol/email-decorum
**Specifically, please take note of the following clauses and please all follow them, so that we can have a respectful dialog.**
3. No "personality-based" discussion. Speculation or accusations about another's motives, thought processes, or beliefs is off-charter. A focus on 'issues rather than personalities' should be the participants' guiding light. Personal attacks, verbal threats and/or harassment can be grounds for loss of subscription.
4. No misrepresentation of another's work. Participants shall not misrepresent the work of others and shall make a good faith effort to be factually correct.
6. No insulting, disparaging, degrading, or demeaning language or any other ad hominem attacks. It's never necessary to label others in order to discuss their ideas and activities. Chronic, hurtful sarcasm, or giving people vengeful nicknames, or any other disrespectful treatment of fellow activists, is grounds for loss of subscription…
Thanks all,
Eric Brooks SGA Vote Administrator -- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes@sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
-- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes@sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes