[sudo-discuss] Agenda Item for next week's meeting: ONL is not a member collective.

[Andrew Lowe]

*does not make them ... arg typo


On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Andrew Lowe <andrew at lostways.com> wrote:

> My other larger point is that the way forward is not to fight amongst
> ourselves, politicians will be politicians no mater if they are in an
> debate or not. The fact that ONL invited them in a restricted format, does
> make them (ONL) at fault for how manipulative the political system is.
>
> Do you really think they don't have canned responses for pretty much any
> question you could ask? If they didn't they would have never agreed to show
> up. That's how politicians work. Don't blame ONL for our failed political
> system, is all.
>
>
> --Andrew
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Andrew Lowe <andrew at lostways.com> wrote:
>
>> My point is that whether or not the show was political or entertainment,
>> event producers should have some autonomy in how they run their events.
>> Feed back is welcome, but there was no brekaing of any collective policy
>> that i know of, even so it's being used as an official reason to strip a
>> group of it's membership. I find that unnerving, should we have to run the
>> content and format of all events by the collective for fear that an event
>> could lead to a group losing it's membership?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:50 AM, yar <yardenack at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Andrew Lowe <andrew at lostways.com> wrote:
>>> > I did not attend this event, but I have attended ONL events before.
>>> ONL is a
>>> > talk show, I'm not sure why not being political enough makes them
>>> > "offensive". I mean I will let them speak for them selves, but they
>>> are an
>>> > entertainment show, why would you expect a "debate" at a talk show?
>>> >
>>> > Anyway, just standing up for this show even if it isn't really my cup
>>> of tea
>>> > all the time, I think what ONL has been able to do with it is pretty
>>> > amazing, and to force them out because their show isn't radical enough
>>> in
>>> > the ways you want it to be would be a shame.
>>>
>>> Sorry to beat a dead horse here, but just for the record ...
>>>
>>> 1) To bill Saturday's show as apolitical "entertainment" would be
>>> disingenuous. They did not invite Dan Siegel the private citizen to
>>> chat with him about his hobbies. They invited three candidates for an
>>> upcoming election to air campaign commercials, give stump speeches and
>>> answer token questions about their political platform. Exactly that,
>>> no more, no less.
>>>
>>> 2) Absolutely nothing in my critique was "radical". It was barely even
>>> liberal. Asking for substantive debate is about the most centrist
>>> position you could possibly imagine. Has our overton window really
>>> shifted this much?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ---------
>> Andrew Lowe
>> http://www.lostways.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ---------
> Andrew Lowe
> http://www.lostways.com
>



-- 
---------
Andrew Lowe
http://www.lostways.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20140910/cd52a59f/attachment.html>