Theos-Talk Archives (July 2010 Message tt00032)

The message from Charles is very welcome and the points he has made are well
taken.

Theos-talk, as an independent mailing list not connected with or controlled
by any organization or leader, has provided a free forum to disseminate news
and information to anyone interested in theosophy and TS.

It proved itself as a blessing to TS in providing timely information and
facts to members world-wide during the last International Election (which
many theosophists consider a real critical crisis in the TS since the
Leadbeater crisis over a century ago) and I am confident that it will
continue to provide a forum to help theosophy and TS for years to come.

Since the current election in question is in NZ, it is primarily relevant to
the members in NZ to discuss the issues and candidates. However. anyone is
welcome to participate in the discussions.

Let us keep tuned.

MKR

On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Charles Sitwell <csitwell@xtra.co.nz>wrote:

>
>
> As one of the Candidates, I felt it might be OK to make some response to
> MKR's posting. Personally I am quite willing to have open discussion on any
>
> topic relevant to the future.
>
> The internet is a useful tool, but it does have some limitations. The
> interchange of ideas in this discussion group has all too often declined
> into slanging matches, due often to initial misunderstanding of the use of
> words.
>
> In my opinion, which may or may not be "humble" :-) we should at least try
> to stick to the rule, normally enforced in formal debating, that
> arguementum
> ad hominum is not admissible. I am, let me hasten to add, lest we already
> get into misunderstanding, not referring to the current point of
> discussion,
> but to the use of email as a means of theosophical communication in
> general.
> I am making this point as it may explain, if not in some minds excuse, the
> apparent reluctance of some leading TS members to interact in discussion
> groups.
>
> Incidentally I was not aware that the Rome Congress was being streamed
> live,
> thanks for that info.
>
> I do rather question the suggestion that there should be "campaigning" for
> the administrative positions in the TS, whether at the Section level or the
>
> International. Definitely there should be information provided about the
> Candidates, and they should be ready and willing to answer any questions
> about what they hope to promote in the position for which they have offered
>
> to serve. But the vigorous self-promotion required in Political campaigns
> seems very far away from the ideals of selfless service that we hope
> inspire
> any who seek positions in the TS. Certainly denigration of other Candidates
>
> on any excuse should be seen as unacceptable. If health is generally
> thought to be an issue, then there should be a constitutional requirement
> to
> include a medical certificate with the Nomination form, not have it used as
>
> a campaign tactic.
>
> I would suggest that before offering oneself for one of the higher offices,
>
> one should have done enough work in the Society to be known reasonably
> widely in the constituency involved. In our local (New Zealand) situation,
> two of the three Candidates have given talks in most if not all of the
> branches over a number of years and the third is certainly known to at
> least
> one or two members in many of the branches.
>
> As to the secrecy of mailing lists, surely this is in the interests of
> members, not of potential or existing Candidates for national/International
>
> position. It it not the case that accessibility of the Candidates to the
> members is more desirable, from a Democratic point of view, than accessibly
>
> of the members to the Candidates?
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]