[MD] A PROPOSAL TO ADDRESS "THE POINT"

[Platt Holden]

Ian asks:

> > > What is the alternative to letting leaders "emerge".
> > > No clues needed ? Shall we spread a little of that precious democratic
> > > freedom, maybe ?
> >
> > The alternative is what happens in everyday life. Potential leaders are
> > subjected to a series of tests over time. Those who do well move up.
> > Those who don't flunk out.
> 
> [IG] "A series of tests" ... is a bit "weasly" to use your chosen
> word. Care to elaborate on any practical specifics that might fit our
> current situation ? Do well ? Move up ? How will we (practically, here and
> now) recognise "doing well" ? What does moving up mean ... gaining what
> exactly, power, authority, rights, responsibilties, freedoms, wealth,
> groupies, and entry in "who's who" ... what specifically (practically, here
> and now)

If you really would like to know what I mean by "tests" I suggest you read
biographies of great leaders. For Americans start with a biography of  
Washington; for the British, Churchill. As for our "current situation," 
only two that I know have met tests specifically related to interpretation 
of the  MOQ -- Ant and Dan. 

> > > What kinds of "committee" are the lesser of that particular evil ?
> > > (Maybe transparent ones we can replace at the drop of a hat, maybe ones
> > > that don't "produce" anything, merely resolve editorial chores on our
> > > behalf. What are your ideas ?)
> >
> > One author working with one editor. That's my idea.
> 
> [IG] Hmm. All our eggs in one basket ... the "being run-over by a bus"
> question arises, but OK, so without naming names could you identify /
> choose one of each such individual. Would you name names ... etc.? What
> would you see as the role / scope / expectations of that one author. I had
> in mind dozens of authors, 3 (or 5) elected editors BTW, just in case that
> wasn't obvious. (PS I still recommend reading what Arlo actually suggested
> / reasoned.)

IMO Ant is by far the most qualified to write a primer, guide or what have 
you and Dan has proven his ability as an editor with Lila's Child. If both 
are agreeable, that would be my choice. And I would leave it entirely up 
to the author to decide "role/scope/expectations."  If you don't t like 
the result, don't buy it. But the last thing the project needs is a bunch 
of magpie critics cackling from peanut gallery -- a guaranteed way to 
produce a mediocre work..    

> > > Ian
> > > aka The Prick (of Conscience, what else ?)
> > > BTW I didn't know you believed in the existence of emergence :-)
> >
> > I don't. That's why I put it in quotes. "Emerge" like "chance" is weasle
> > way of saying, "I don't know."  But, I could be wrong. :-)
> 
> [IG] Stop press, Platt admits he could be wrong ;-)
> Seriously though, if "I don't know" is the true case, then Emerge and
> Chance are simply statements of that truth, they're just words. I
> would say what they really say is "I don't know as precisely /
> certainly as you'd like" ... they hide a lot of interconnected detail
> you can't always squeeze into one sentence, one assertion. Just
> pragmatically useful metaphors for here and now.
 
Not in my book. "Emerge" and "chance" are declarations of total ignorance, 
as in "By chance the egg emerged from the chicken"

But, I could be wrong (which contrary to your "hold the presses") I 
declare from time to time just to demonstrate my Christian humility. :-)  

Regards,
Platt