[Theforum] Re: (was) let's kill it, kill, kill, kill!

Brian King BKing at Impact-Technologies.com
Thu Apr 18 07:55:26 CDT 2002

I apologize up front for spending more time lurking and not speaking.  But
this is a subject that strikes a chord with me too.  I contribute heavily to
other organizations and am happy to do so 'because' of their organization.
I also remain a contributor to them because they don't exhibit the derisive
nature that I very often see here at evolt of late.  The following is an

I can respond to Martin's email in two ways, neither of which uses vulgar
words, but one of which is very derisive, digressive and insulting in

Response #1:
Your statement/logic is flawed.  The Joint Chiefs of staff report directly
to the President of the United States and have to explicitly follow the
orders as given from that single position.  I don't know the structure of
the UK's military organization, but would frankly be surprised if there were
not a chief in command rather than a group.  (Of course this might explain
why the US won the revolution against the UK a couple hundred years ago.)
Evolt will also fail unless it recognizes it's fundamental structural flaw
if not sole authoritative structure.

Response #2:
Maybe a better example here could be that the United States has a
constitutional balance between the Executive, Judicial and Legislative
branches of government.  They all have the ability to perform their own
tasks with a sole authority in those areas but the decisions made under
those sole authorities can be negated by another branch.  Those decisions
cannot be changed by another branch but merely negated/vetoed and sent back
to the authoritative branch to be redone/reconsidered/reworded.  Each branch
though, as stated earlier has it's own pyramidal authority, such as the
military where the three, (roughly speaking and has changed over the years),
branches of the military, report to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Joint
Chiefs report to the President.  The President may have the ultimate sole
authority over the Joint Chiefs, but his decisions can be legislated by the
Legislative branch and or struck down as unconstitutional, (etc etc.), by
the Judicial branch.  'Sole' authority in specific areas and yet positively
balanced by other 'sole' authorities.  This is where I see evolt struggling,
with the establishment of single 'points' of authority that balance each
other.  Could a possibility be, the need to identify the areas that need
administration and balance them against each other in a manner similar,
(using the word similar loosely here), to the method the States government

You see the first response is the 'attitude' that I see all to often taken
here, even in this very thread.  The second is what I feel is a constructive
contribution to the thread.  It is not derisive, (at least not intended that
way), and makes and attempt at steering the discussion towards a positive
conclusion.  Starting responses out with words such as 'your logic is
flawed' and most successful business wouldn't take your approach because',
are inflammatory and digressive in nature where they are attacks on the
originators point of view.  To find flaw in the others opinion is not always
necessary and usually not constructive.  If you have an opposing opinion,
state it and let it stand on it's own merits.  Let the reader make the
judgment as to which opinion holds more merit, neither of which may be
wrong, but which one is more applicable to the situation at hand.

Sorry about the lengthy response.  Just wanted to get my 2 cents/pence in.
I will go back to lurking mode to see the outcome now.


-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Burns
Subject: RE: [Theforum] Re: (was) let's kill it

Ah, something like Parliament? Armies in democracies answer to groups of
people. (I may be wrong but I also have a feeling that the very top of the
UK and
US armed forces are groups of people too - "The Joint Chiefs of Staff" or


More information about the theforum mailing list