Cohousing-L Mailing List: RE: kill the messenger/kill the rhetoric

[Ruddick, T.R. (RUDDICK]

Liz, when you offer the following:

"Find out more of what George says about "cultlike" cohousing by doing a
search on Googol.com. This is readily available public information, and good
background material for understanding his point of view. For that matter,
you can find what anyone on this list has said."

Then I have a clue that there is more information and insight that could
benefit me.  Could you possibly give me search terms or url or other data to
help in that search.

On the other hand, Liz, when you insist:

"Third, I never called anyone names. Criticize my bluntness or whatever you
want to call it, but don't put words in my mouth."

I compare it with some of your other statements:

"Spare me your snobby verbosity."
"Let others fear the bullies of this world;"
"...I'm making the dilettantes uncomfortable."

I have to wonder if you and I need to discuss our understanding of the terms
"snob" and "bully" and "dilettante" because those certainly sound like
insulting names to me.

I should note that I'm posting this to the entire list because it's dealing
with statements you've made to the entire list.  I hope I am not coming off
as superior or nagging in this matter; as noted in my earlier post, I
support your right to contradict and correct others here--I'm just having a
little trouble understanding your meanings, and I think in large part that's
because you're really steamed.

So could you please give me more facts???  Thanks.

Whatever. Drop me off the list if I can't contribute.

Liz

> From: Fred H Olson <fholson [at] cohousing.org>
> Reply-To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 10:43:38 -0600 (CST)
> To: -cohousing-L mailing list <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
> Subject: [C-L]_COOL THE RHETORIC, PLEASE
> 
> A note from Fred the list manager
> 
> Cohousing-L has been hyperactive lately and included in all that activity
> have been some things that I hope would not be said after a bit of
> reflection or via other less 'detached' media.
> 
> Please choose your words carefully.  If in doubt let your reply
> sit for a day and see if it still looks appropriate to be posted then.
> Consider letting unsettling words go without reply , they speak for
> themselves and others will draw their own conclusions.  Blame it on the
> media.
> 
> I have taken the unprecidented step of putting two subscribers on
> moderated status temporarily.  Their messages will come to me for review
> before being posted.  As always everything that is sent to the list
> (except blatant SPAM etc ) will be distributed but I will impose a delay
> on messages from these two subscribers that I deem to approach infractions
> of our usual decorum.  This hopefully will calm things down a bit.
> 
> 
> A couple of other notes.
> 
> If you have a message to post that could wait a few days, consider doing
> waiting.  With all the activity, your message is unlikely to get the
> attention it would after things cool off a bit.
> 
> Also there has been a rash of messages containing HTML, please try not to
> post messages with HTML to cohousing-L.  See message about HTML at:
> http://csf.colorado.edu/cohousing/2001/msg01672.html
> 
> Fred cohousing-L list manager
> 
> --
> 1/29/02 The "Crooked" E: How true it is!  (Enron T - shirt)
> More info:   http://www.mtn.org/~fholson/sig-detail.htm
> Fred H. Olson  Minneapolis,MN 55411   (near north Mpls)
> fholson [at] cohousing.org 612-588-9532 (7am-10pm Cent time)
> List manager of Cohousing-L & Nbhd-tc  Ham radio:WB0YQM
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list
> Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
> http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l


--__--__--

Message: 6
To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
Subject: Re: [C-L]_Lesbians and gays in cohousing -- Pattee
From: cml [at] mmalt.guild.org (Jayne Kulikauskas)
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 02 19:25:01 EST
Organization: home of Kulikauskas family
Reply-To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org

Maggi Rohde <maggi [at] intranet.org> writes:

> Christine Pattee wrote:
> > My sense is that gay people fit in fine (and that a non-monogamous
couple
> > of any gender would be a problem in most social circles).
> 
> Hmm.  That's comforting.  =(  But thanks for your candor.
> 
> I hope that any community in which I become involved would judge me and my
> partners as individuals, regardless of their (or my) gender, and by the
> same standards they judge monogamous (or straight) people.

I suspect that I actually agree with you but I have a problem the
way you have phrased this. The standard for monogamous people is
that they confine themselves to one partner.  That is a reasonable
standard for people who have taken a vow to do just that.  Imposing
that standard on people who have not taken it upon themselves is
probably a major cause of unfair negative attitudes toward the
consciously non-monogamous.  I would say that judging polys by the
same standards as one judges the monongamous is exactly what a
community should *not* do.

Jayne Kulikauskas
 member of Whole Village: Sustainable Farm Community
  currently under development - see www.wholevillage.org

--__--__--

Message: 7
To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
From: cml [at] mmalt.guild.org (Jayne Kulikauskas)
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 02 19:46:51 EST
Organization: home of Kulikauskas family
Subject: [C-L]_questions about list netiquette
Reply-To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org

I have been lurking on this list for a little while and recently
started posting.  I have checked the archives and website for
information on the expectations for this list but cannot find very
much.  All I have found are references to basic netiquette regarding
quoting, subject lines, and checking archives before asking
questions.  

Is there a document on netiquette specific to this list that I have
overlooked?  Is there a preference that new people introduce
themselves?  Is there a general feeling that certain topics or
styles of language are inappropriate here?  

I would want to know about these things in any event but especially
after some recent messages.  I'm trying to make sense of reactions
to George's post (about the proposed children's playhouse) and
reactions to the reactions. I do not feel that a month or so of
lurking and a random sampling of the archives have given me enough
background to understand this.

Jayne Kulikauskas
 member of Whole Village: Sustainable Farm Community
  currently under development - see www.wholevillage.org

--__--__--

Message: 8
From: "Rob Sandelin" <floriferous [at] msn.com>
To: <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
Subject: RE: [C-L]_Need legal opinion from CA groups
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 18:46:16 -0800
Reply-To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org

I am interested to know about who cares about these things. In CA are there
HOA cops which monitor what you do? At Sharingwood I am quite sure at times
we have not operated legally. We don't care, as long as what we do works for
us, state HOA rules don't matter. Nobody but us would ever know or care and
there are no penalaties, nor anyone to enforce them if their were. Heck, my
state can't even keep its state library open, much less run around and check
up on condo associations.

A good question to ask your accountant is, what's the penalty for not
operating under the rules.

Rob Sandelin

-----Original Message-----
From: cohousing-l-admin [at] cohousing.org
[mailto:cohousing-l-admin [at] cohousing.org]On Behalf Of Marty Roberts
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 10:38 AM
To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
Subject: [C-L]_Need legal opinion from CA groups


We have been given an "opinion" by our accountant that it is not legal to
use our HOA dues to pay consultants for training, conflict resolution,
workshops, retreats, etc.  This person says HOA dues are legally only for
repairs and maintenance of the property.  Some of us think that training our
"board" is an important HOA function, but have no legal evidence of this.
Some people here have proclaimed that we can no longer hire these people
from our HOA budget - at least not until we get a firm legal opinion.

I am wondering if anyone out there in California (since laws differ state to
state) knows the answer, or a work-around, or where to get the answer.

If we get hard evidence that is true, we may consider reducing our HOA dues
and then paying in to a "voluntary" fund to pay trainers, but would really
prefer not to.

Any help is appreciated.
Thanks very much,

Marty Roberts
Two Acre Wood
Sebastopol, CA

_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l


--__--__--

Message: 9
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 20:43:15 -0700
From: Patty & Pat Nowlin/Guyn <pattypat [at] cadvision.com>
Organization: Pat Squared
To: cohousing list <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
Subject: [C-L]_Changes in Decision Making Processes
Reply-To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org

I am a member of the Wholelife group in Calgary, Alberta, Canada and we
are finally entering our construction phase!!!  During the design phase
we made all decisions by consensus, either at a committee level or a
large group level.    We are now entering a phase where we do not have
the luxury of time to consense on every decision.  We have had 1  group
member be the contact between our consultants and the group  and he has
done a great job.   Unfortunately, he has decided to leave this role as
he believes (as do many others in our group)  that we cannot continue to
have meetings and consensus on every decision regarding construction.
My questions to the list are:
  Have other groups found that their decision making processes changed
during the construction phase?  What have groups found to be the most
efficient  way to make decisions during the construction phase?


Patty Nowlin
Calgary, Alberta, Canada


--__--__--

Message: 10
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 21:16:16 -0700 (MST)
From: Maggi Rohde <maggi [at] intranet.org>
To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
Subject: Re: [C-L]_Lesbians and gays in cohousing -- Pattee
Reply-To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org

I wrote:
> > I hope that any community in which I become involved would judge me and
my
> > partners as individuals, regardless of their (or my) gender, and by the
> > same standards they judge monogamous (or straight) people.

Then Jayne replied:
> I suspect that I actually agree with you but I have a problem the
> way you have phrased this. The standard for monogamous people is
> that they confine themselves to one partner.  That is a reasonable
> standard for people who have taken a vow to do just that.  Imposing
> that standard on people who have not taken it upon themselves is
> probably a major cause of unfair negative attitudes toward the
> consciously non-monogamous.  I would say that judging polys by the
> same standards as one judges the monongamous is exactly what a
> community should *not* do.

Hmm... that's a good point.  I guess I meant "Don't judge me by what you
think I do in bed (assuming it's safe/sane/consensual and I don't wave it
in your face) unless you're in bed with me."  *grin*

Hot topic for me, if you hadn't guessed.  I really like this list -- you
guys (almost) always think things through.

-Maggi Rohde, Ann Arbor
 teacher, librarian, communitarian



--__--__--

_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org
http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l


End of Cohousing-L Digest
_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l