Re: [PyrNet-L] GPCA protest rebuttal

[Impyrial@aol.com]

In a message dated 3/18/1999 12:37:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
MarciaJ1@aol.com writes:

<< The issue is one of ethics not ownership >>
Hi Marcia,
Actually you are not correct in saying that this is an issue of ethics and not
ownership.  This was a membership protest - by denying the applicant
membership, the GPCA board was therefore determining ownership even though a
board appointed committee found (and they had all the evidence relevant to
this case) that this was not an issue for the GPCA and therefore the protest
should not be upheld.
<<if one contracts with another to register a domain name and work on a web
site,that name does not then belong to the person contracted with and paid for
that service.>>
I agree 100% but this was NOT the case.  There were no "contracts" of the kind
and no payments for any "services". 
<<Of course GPCA board members know,know of and/or have personal relationships
with other club members but they also have taken on a responsibility as a
board member.There
is no reason to think they cannot act with objectivity and personal integrity
and in fact are counted on to do so.>>
Yes I truly believe this also and am not questioning anyones personal
integrity.   But, this was clearly not an issue that should have been voted on
by the board in the first place.
This needs to end now.  We are wasting the time and energy of the board and
the list.
Karen Justin