|
|
Post by seleen on Jan 28, 2009 12:28:14 GMT 1
I would just like to make a couple of observations and maybe a few suggestions.
My first gripe is about the current vacuum of representation for the vast majority of members, the moot "leaders" in their apparent show of democracy are holding meetings to discuss the way forward before coming back to the moots to see if this finds favour.
Unfortunately after Saturdays meeting after the meal organised by Derek (which the Rainbow moot was unable to attend) and a few things were decided about, I was a little alarmed to find out how few people are at the moots for a discussion about acceptance of these proposals although it will be put forward that there is general agreement.
I am also somewhat alarmed to find out that there is little liaison with Martin and Rhiannon about their wishes about the use of the Pagan Association name and I am wondering about the wasted time in regards to the "mooted" name of Pagan Association Network (PAN).
Suggestion time........
How about canvassing the members in as many ways as possible to actually come to an informed consensus about what they actually want (I know that might be a bit of a toughie).
What about "Pagan Alliance" as it keeps the PA acronym and alliance suggests network
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 28, 2009 13:14:18 GMT 1
Hello Seleen
Firstly without seeming to be rude, do we know you? Do you attend any of the moots that are being mentioned? You haven't posted an introduction so it's a little confusing.
The Pagan Alliance was a name given to a very short-lived group that tried to form in Birmingham a couple of years ago with a deliberate attempt to use the same initials in order to cause maximum confusion. I think there is a general consensus to avoid a name that could be confused with other people (hence the trying to get away from the Pagan Association, and Pagan Association Network would probably lead to confusion with both the Pagan Association and Pagan Network).
I'm intrigued by the use of the term 'members' as at the moment there is nothing to be a member of, unless we are talking moots and this forum.
The new name 'Paganus' has been suggested, as it is the original Latin word for Pagans, which seems nicely fitting. (Though it is also the name of a heavy metal band so we could get some interesting google searches!) Are there any other names to throw into the mix?
Rhiannon
|
|
|
|
Post by brian on Jan 28, 2009 13:59:37 GMT 1
I've not got involved with the arguement on the other thread over the Imbolc meal and subsequent "informal" meeting as I have very strong views covering both sides and will undoubtably offend folk I like to think of as friends so best keep out of it.
As for "names" how about just sticking "Midlands" or "Mercian" in front of Pagan Association?
|
|
|
|
Post by ian on Jan 28, 2009 14:50:32 GMT 1
Brian the problem with both of those names would be again the direct link to 'Pagan Association,' and so thus not actually moving away from it! I still like the name Pagan Association Network, but again obviously there are the problems with it being too much alike to the PA, also the Pagan Network, which I believe is still going as an online group? I for one would still like to hold onto the name pagan Association full stop, and yes I honestly do appreciate martin's views on why he wants to remove the name now that both he and Rhiannon have decided to move on, but all the time I keep hearing the same words over and over again from my (now not so good) memory bank, these words from Martin himself time and time again - "The PA is not me, the PA is each and every one of you and all the moots" So I still cannot realistically see why the name should be allowed to be taken away, simply because Martin and Rhiannon have now moved onto other things! Obviously it would need to be made perfectly clear to all and sundry, that the PA is now being run from a completely different source and that it is in no way any longer connected with either Martin or Rhiannon. |
|
|
|
Post by brian on Jan 28, 2009 15:06:57 GMT 1
Fully agree Ian.
Gods...this is getting to be a habit! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by poshfrock on Jan 28, 2009 15:37:23 GMT 1
what about W.W.W.
Which witch is which? cover all paths and adds to the confustion.
just being a git ;D
Posh x
|
|
|
|
Post by ian on Jan 28, 2009 15:45:26 GMT 1
what about W.W.W. Which witch is which? cover all paths and adds to the confustion. just being a git ;D Posh x Ya git But whats a 'Confustion?' |
|
|
|
Post by poshfrock on Jan 28, 2009 18:49:30 GMT 1
Oh what can I say, Im not feeling very well, got a bad cold. so leave me alone yu horrible little goth,  oh yeah I carn't spell too good either  Posh x |
|
|
|
Post by seleen on Jan 28, 2009 21:19:37 GMT 1
Ok then if you want to be politically correct then I would like to put forward
Pagan Central
|
|
|
|
Post by moonsmith on Jan 29, 2009 0:10:42 GMT 1
In case you didn't see my post on the other thread - it is repeated here:
I'm way out on the edge but I'd like to see some healing in this community pretty soon.
Are the community aware that the PAN moot has been running in South Wales for many years. Sedge, who runs it, is a very interesting man if we could get him to talk about Pantheism at one of our moots.
|
|
|
|
Post by seleen on Jan 30, 2009 13:02:38 GMT 1
Being P.C. was meant to be a joke a.k.a. Pagan Central (lets be PC) i.e. many a true word spoke in jest was meant to introduce a little levity.
As for introductions is that a request or a requirement? I have been told (due to PC) that in my profession I cannot use the term "rude" and must say emotionally negative. I hope my observations are emotionally neutral and are not said to cause offence.
I originally joined the forum last September for information and contacts about the then meeting to discuss the future of the PA only later to find out that it was for moot leaders only!and having no reply I hope my current postings are informative in opening up the discussion for the majority.
Duma
duma (dOO'mä) [key], Russian name for a representative body, particularly applied to the Imperial Duma established as a result of the Russian Revolution of 1905. The parliamentary organization of 1906, largely the work of Count Witte, provided for a state council (an upper house, with some members appointed by the czar and others elected by the nobility, the zemstvos, the clergy, trade and industry, and the university faculties) and for the Duma (a lower house elected by a system of suffrage that was neither equal nor direct); no law was to be passed without the consent of the Duma. When Czar Nicholas II found that a majority of opposition candidates had been elected in 1906, he dissolved the Duma after 10 weeks. The second Duma (1907), even more hostile to the government, was also dissolved. The third Duma (1907–12) was the product of an electoral change that made it the tool of the government. It did, however, extend the peasants' rights and enact some labor laws. The fourth Duma (1912–17) had a conservative majority; called at rare and brief intervals, it was in constant conflict with the czar. It was dissolved by Nicholas in Mar., 1917 (Feb., O. S.), but refused to disband. Revolution (see Russian Revolution) broke out, and the Duma, after electing a provisional committee, disintegrated. The committee and the Petrograd soviet appointed the provisional government. The current State Duma (est. 1993) is the popularly elected lower house of the Russia Federation's legislature.
Perhaps history is repeating itself?
Or ;-0
Name: Duma
Gender: Boy
Origin: Hebrew
Meaning: Silence
|
|
