Re: Rules vs No Rules
From: Fred H Olson (fholsoncohousing.org)
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:50:49 -0600 (MDT)
Sheila, Northern Vermont Cohousing   nvc [at] surfglobal.net
is the author of the message below but due to a problem 
(posted from address other than subscribed address),
it was posted by Fred the Cohousing-L list manager:  fholson [at] cohousing.org

To get off Cohousing-L, send email with UNSUBSCRIBE COHOUSING-L in the 
msg body to:  listproc [at] cohousing.org   Questions? email Fred - addr above
--------------------  FORWARDED MESSAGE FOLLOWS --------------------

I guess I would often be mistaken for someone who doesn't believe in rules,
but I would describe myself as someone who believes that rules come at a
price (often unacknowledged) and that many rules deal with surface reality
only, missing the true point.

Here's an example: *All dogs must remain on leashes* has a cost, which
includes the freedom of dogs and their owners (just try keeping a dog on a
leash while you push a stroller and you'll see what I mean), and exercise
for dogs (on a leash a dog takes 1/20th the walk she does off leash). And it
misses the real point, which is that dogs should cause no harm to humans or
their stuff. So, in my book, the rule *Dogs should cause no harm to humans
or their stuff* is much more on point and costs less.

In community,
Sheila

Northern Vermont Cohousing
phone (802) 862-8657
fax (802) 862-8697
web site www.nvcohousing.org
14 Moss Glen Lane
South Burlington, VT 05403-7274









Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.