NR - Discussion of Principality for North (ws Re: too much q
Miller at pp.okstate.edu
Tue Mar 17 14:20:19 PST 1998
> I know for a fact that a few of the long-time movers and shakers up here
> are opposed about 101% to the formation of a principality, and shudder
> to hear the word "Nordsteorra". Their opinions are valid, and should be
Absolutely. I am not willing to push the issue if it will be
detrimental to the health and stability of the region. I would
really hate to see us polarize into an "us versus them" mentality.
It's not worth pursuing a principality if it is going to cause hard
feelings, factionalization, polarization, animosities, and
destructive anger. On the other hand, I think that it is (should be)
possible to discuss the issue calmly and rationally and still remain
friends even though we may disagree. We just have to go into it
agreeing to disagree agreeably. :-) Or something like that.
> Such an open discussion as has been mentioned will end up in hot flames
> in short order, unless a lot of attention to something like
> parliamentary procedure or something similar is observed. In other
> words, it will take careful pre-planning on the part of the mediator.
That's probably true.
> Probably by default that mediator ought to be the Northern Regional
Now wait a minute! :-)
Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.
More information about the Northern