Posted by Peter Hyland on June 10, 1999 at 15:41:18 from gatekeeper.butterworths.co.uk:
In Reply to: Peter H.'s squeamish members posted by andy bolger on June 10, 1999 at 01:27:02:
Just before this thread vanishes up its own whatsit (and its getting a bit historical now):
I don’t want to re-involve myself in the main theme of Andy’s message, but I can confirm that the ‘Squeamish Member’ was the author of both remarks. I think his main point was that he had been misled by the recruitment literature. I strongly suspect that he has left TARS by now. ‘No great loss’ you may say, but can we afford to lose members? Membership fell for the first time this year, and I could have predicted that when I wrote the Mixed Moss article. What we need, in my opinion, is a firm ‘positioning’ of TARS from top-level, i.e. what it is and what it does, followed by a recruitment drive. It seems to me that arguments about AR as a feminist or any other ‘ist’ are ‘fiddling while Rome burns’. Meanwhile a ‘Development Committee’ has been appointed - to report back in X years. Zzzzzzzzzz . . . . . .