Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Professional Groups
From: Ka <ka () khidr net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:47:40 +0100
Hi all, the question is not wether that "union to be" does the right or the wrong thing. What this group is going to do is to be determined by it's members anyway. The question is wether to let others decide in our field of profession or decide ourselves. That is it's a matter of growing up and not of being right. Many instituations have been (and are) on the power trip (or prestige, or money...). Dependant behaviour and thinking patterns have been the norm. The justification for politics (including union politics) have been the famous inability of the "masses" to decide for themselves. But the institutions keep on representing, guiding and overpowering it's members and citizens. The present society is against individuality and individual decision making. And that is a positive feedback circle -- I'd say a vicious and not a beneficial one. We need not fight others. We simple have the expertise to improve the overall IT situation and thus help others as well as ourselves. Discussion and diversity of standpoints is part of the game. Greetings Ka _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Re: Professional Groups, (continued)
- Re: Professional Groups Bart . Lansing (Jan 12)
- Re: Professional Groups Ka (Jan 12)
- Re: Professional Groups Lan Guy (Jan 13)
- Re: Professional Groups Matt Burnett (Jan 12)
- RE: Professional Groups Schmehl, Paul L (Jan 12)
- RE: Professional Groups Kenton Smith (Jan 12)
- Re: Professional Groups bart2k (Jan 13)
- Re: Professional Groups Ron DuFresne (Jan 13)
- RE: Professional Groups Richard Gadsden (Jan 13)
- RE: Professional Groups Funk Jr, Joseph C. (Jan 13)
- Re: Professional Groups Ka (Jan 13)
- RE: Professional Groups James . Cupps (Jan 13)
- Re: Professional Groups Ka (Jan 13)