At 08:12 PM 9/26/00 -0500, rjohnson@friendlynet.com wrote:
>
> Now, I've certainly got an opinion on everything - but even
>my sub-202 IQ brain tells me to never offer one on Ladies Classes.
>
Good for you!
> In all of my time on the 'net, every time this subject comes up, it is
>GUYS carrying on the debate.
> Look: These parallel classes were created by the women in the
>sport.
Wrong, these parallel ladies classes were adopted by the SEB long ago. This
was based on member (all 3 sexes) input.
> Every single female that runs an 'L' class knows the positive
>and negative benefits of the current structure. Some think it is
>the way it should be. Others have expressed guilt at running
>an 'L' class. Others choose the Open class route.
>
> Paula is right - this is an issue for the women in the club to
>decide. Not us. We have enough to do keeping our 'johnson'
>pointed in the right direction. We have no business trying to
>impose on them our view of the structure that they created.
The ladies did not create the structure, but may have influenced the structure
as it is now. I for one probably contributed! Yes, I am a lady
(sometimes)!
> Interesting that this comes up specifically when under-subscribed
>classes are under discussion. A diversion?
Could be, I dunno.
Sam
>
> Roger II
>
>(I've been thinking and adding all day - If you summed together the IQ
>of every Roger Johnson I know, it wouldn't add up to 202. Hmmmm.)
>
|