[jaws-uk] Re: Ghurka's rights, users rights

In agreement with this but, more so, with the person who pointed out how much 
more annoying the subsequent thread is than the original post which was, after 
all, one short message.  Also appreciating Mike's comments.  Could we maybe 
move on to something else now, though?
Amie

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ken Reid 
  To: JAWS Users 
  Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 12:55 PM
  Subject: [jaws-uk] Ghurka's rights, users rights


  All

  Despite Graham's attempt to close this topic, I see it is still rumbling, so 
I feel a ha'penny worth in support of our moderator is in order.

  The validity of the debate on Ghurkha's contribution to Britain and their 
role in the British army is not the issue here.  This is a worthy campaign, 
which the correspondents clearly feel strongly about.

  However, the Jaws user list is not the vehicle to promote it.  If this were 
permissible, the flood gates would open to fill the list with all manner of 
potentially worthy causes, and some which many would agree were not worthy.

  When we joined the list we agreed to abide by the rules, that indicated that 
the purpose of the list was to support Jaws users, not promote other causes.  
Blatant disregard of the rules of any group or organisation will lead to 
sanctions, and in this case, suspension after warning is perfectly legitimate.

  Talks is access technology which aids many visually impaired users, so whilst 
"slightly off topic" (as the original message on the Ghurkha's was introduced) 
touches the periphery of this list, and would be seen as legitimate as far as 
it went.  Detailed discussion on Talks, on the other hand, should be reserved 
for the Talks list.

  I wish you all well with your campaigning, and in your use of Jaws.

  Ken

Other related posts: