On 2013-12-13, Stephen Thomas Cole <
use...@stephenthomascole.com> wrote:
> Sara Merriman <
sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <
memo.2013121...@postmaster.cix.co.uk>, Paul
>> Cummins <
agree2...@spam.vlaad.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <
bh01si...@mid.individual.net>, Aero....@mail.invalid
>>> (Spike) wrote:
>>>
>>>> No. I was speaking about this RFD and the possible reasons for it.
>>>
>>> So was I. It seems this RFD, as with all of the others to date, are a
>>> narcissistic attempt to garner attention for the proponent, and have
>>> absolutely no measurable benefit to the hierarchy.
>>>
>>> This, IMO< is also supported by his false claim to be the
>>>> UK Usenet Head of Social Media and PR.
>>>
>>> And I for one am dismayed that the committee has not seen fit to correct
>>> or een publicly comment on this blatant lie.
>>
>> Yet you seem to support his idea that the Committee either has or
>> should have, powers beyond that which are granted by the electorate, by
>> saying that.
>
> I was told, essentially, by many folk, some who happen to be Committee
> members (although I am not suggesting that they were speaking *as*
> Committee members) to please myself re the social media initiative. So I
> am.
>
> I don't want to clutter this RFD thread with this, but will be happy to
> discuss with anybody in a new thread. As .discussion does not currently
> exist, I'd suggest .management as the best venue, although such would be
> outwith the charter of that group.
>
> Xposted, FUd.
Or, you could cover it in
uk.net.
FU set.
--
Tony Evans
Seeking archives for uk.* from 1998 and older. Especially interested
in uk.net.news.* and any groups which preceded uk.net.news.* for
hierarchy management (uk.misc?
uk.net?).