[CR]The intent of the law vs. the letter of the law

(Example: History:Norris Lockley)

To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: "Bianca Pratorius" <biankita@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 17:16:54 -0400
Subject: [CR]The intent of the law vs. the letter of the law

I have just re-read the list rules, and I am not surprised to find out that I have inadvertently broken one of the rules. I have listed items for sale without providing photos in some cases. Perhaps, from time to time, I have overposted the three post limit. I have to agree with ALL who weighed in on this one item of the list rules. A day is both 24 hours from time of first posting, AND it is also the time you normally would wake up to the time you would normally go to sleep. It is also 0001 hours to 1200 hours. However one interprets a day, both the alleged violators and the those that made the allegations were correct in one way or another. Whether you adhere to the letter of the law or the intent, I think matters very little when it comes to our friendly list. The problems come when someone knowingly violates the rules. The problem is one of violation with impunity. As long as the listmember is trying to adhere to some understanding of the rules, I think there will be no problem. A functional society is composed of members who try their best most of the time, and that is what we have here. Small skirmishes are to be expected and as long as they stay small and relatively friendly so all will go well. Someone has to judge or oversee the operations and I am quite happy that that someone is not me. It's a headache to be in charge -- I am sure. Thank you Dale, and thank you to all the well meaning contributors. What I would like to see is that some of the lurkers out there move out of their comfort zone .... the shy, the timid, the reluctant to speak out. Much can be learned from them too. I have one person in mind, but all the encouragement I have given him has resulted in nothing to date. Such is life.

Garth Libre in Miami Fl. USA