Re: Arabeyes Charter Proposal

["Chahine M. Hamila" <mch at chaham dot com>]

Salaam,
I have no problem discussing some of the articles personally. So whatever is voted yes and
neutral is passed I guess (I guess since Moe voted yes to the charter, it is for him too,
correct me if I'm wrong).
Before considering the rest passed too (even though technically they are, we can still amen
what you think is not ok if the majority is for it), I would like to to take a look at your
nos:

Isam Bayazidi a *crit :

> NO              for     A.2     //( shouldn't be in a charter, the UN human rights says it)

:) Well, we can remove it I guess, but I think it is very important to remind it because it
happened at some point that it seemed forgotten to me.

>
> NO              for     D.3

Can you propose an alternative way to give each of us a 'lesser veto'? Something that would
give us a way to complete block an inclusion we think would be incompatible with ourselves
while still not paralyzing the team if it's determined enough?

>
> NO              for     E

What do you propose for exclusion?

>
> NO              for     F //needs restructuring to make it clear ( points)

Can you propose an alternative?

>
> It seems that you have a lot to disagree on then to agree on :-) Now, let us
> remember what we ALL agree on:
> - Arabeyes is there for a reason
> - Arabeyes is to fulfill its goals
> - We volunteered for Arabeyes because we believe in the GOALS of Arabeyes,
> and want to help fulfill them

Isam, I happen to agree with what you are saying above here but (and I don't mean Nadim
personally, but speaking in general), if the vision of how to go forward is very different, a
working team is doomed. This is the ABC of any project in fact. Take a country for example,
different parties can all want the greater good of the country, but they can be different
enough on how they think thet achieve it to make it impossible to settle in one same
governement. That's very true in any managing team in any project.
Yalla, salaam,
Chahine