Proposal 186

Formerly known to its sponsors as “List serve protocol guidelines” proposal, the Green Party of Utah initiated a proposal for developing guidelines for list serve etiquette on the national GPUS lists. Several states joined in developing the proposal and signed on as co-sponsors. It took weeks to develop.

When the proposal was submitted for discussion, there was a lot of discussion. At the request of the presenters, many folks were welcoming to such a proposal and submitted constructive feedback and suggestions for modifying the language. A few others were harshly and very loudly critical of even having such a proposal, stating that having such was an “infringement on free speech”.

The presenters received so much feedback that they decided to request an extension of the discussion period. This has been done in the past on many occasions. In fact, there are instances of proposals being withdrawn as well.

No similar action has drawn so much outrage by a few than this one. Call me “paranoid”, but I feel it has everything to do with it being a Utah proposal. Otherwise, had similar reactions occured in the past when proposal presenters requested extensions, I would not have been surprised.

While there does not appear to be any provision in the GPUS bylaws for this type of request, a precedent is set by virtue of the fact that it has become accepted practice for proposal presenters to control the proposal until it goes to vote. Apparently it’s been that way from the beginning of the voting lists.

Proposal 186 was developed out of the cry from many folks to develop some guidelines to help keep dicussions respectful and focused. Several GPUS NC list memebers, in recent discussions, have been personally degrading to other NC members and some NC members have left the list with a few having left the party entirely. It has become an unsafe place to hold discussions for many in the NC.

Free speech would not be inhibited by this proposal. Free speech is not about using swear words or slinging insults anytime you choose. Free speech is all about having the right to convey one’s message in a responsible way. I do not mean to say that I would inhibit the use of swear words or insults in certain situations (I am “guilty” as charged….)but let’s face it: Which kind of communication will likely get better results in the form of a response from your representative to whom you want to convey your personal message–shouting insults in the form of four-letter words or a personal discussion or written letter which passionately and diplomatically outlines your position on an issue?

As I teach my students about our First Amendment rights (my school is a First Amendment School),I help them to realize that with the right of free speech comes responsibility and respect. While everyone has the right to free speech, we all also have the right to be free of insults and personal attacks in certain situations. We all have the responsibility to exercise our right of free speech while doing it in such a way that best conveys our message. There are many different ways to do this and each situtaion warrants the most appropriate way of getting the message across.

I have to say that although I disagree with most of his positions, Ken Bingham, a local citizen blogger who is a conservative, has always been very polite to me and diplomatic in his responses. I appreciate that and it helps keep me in check with the language I use.

Hopefully proposal 186 will be modified to everyone’s liking and will pass so that those who would like to engage in disucssion but won’t because of the likelihood of personal attack, will feel safe once again to be involved in intelligent discussions about the real work the GPUS should be doing.

While the world’s citizens are being abused and the planet is being destroyed, a few GPUS NC members are choosing instead to focus their energies on destroying each other above being out in the trenches to do something about the world’s injustices.

It’s a real shame and very sad.