>Sounds good to me, any other confirmations ?
>- rob -
Pretty Good. What about the last four years as an IGC group (awf.rainbownews)?
Perhaps for "...peace and healing in general." say " ...peace and healing in
the context of a loving, generous community."
For "...discussing Rainbow Gatherings worldwide." say "...discussing Rainbow
Gatherings in both urban and 'wilderness' settings worldwide."
I guess I could accept it as it is, but perhaps a somewhat more generous
approach would explain the >>scene<< more clearly?
My Suggestion:
Version 4 29 March 1993
{{{{{ Proposed alt.gathering.rainbow Newsgroup Charter }}}}}
Version 4:
"For discussing Rainbow Gatherings in urban, rural and 'wilderness' settings
worldwide.
The group also includes issues relevant to those interested in learning more
about peace and healing in the context of a loving, generous community. The
newsgroup has been in existence for 9 months and receives regular postings."
}}}}} ### {{{{{
With great respect and awe at the Council Process in its most pure form.......
(((((
Regarding online council process--
In awf.rainbownews, it was our informal consensus to use a process similar to
the following:::
A question is opened for comment for a two to four week period, at the end of
which the consensus is noted as having been accepted, if there have been no
further blocks or comments, and re-iterated for the record.
At this time, further commentary may be opened to suggest changes to the
accepted consensus, but they cannot, after the initial period, >block< the
consensus on the point in question.
Does this seem like a good informal working process? How long should the open
period be?
Of course, no consensus of this online community may be taken as representative
of the decision of the North American (or any other) Rainbow Family Tribal
Council, but is solely an agreement of like minded individuals interested in
pursuing common goals.
)))))
Play-for-Peace Peter