More questions for MEG

[Cindy C.]

Hi!

Amanda wrote:

> I am speaking strictly in my personal capacity. This is just Amanda. 
> I am not a faceless MEG entity at the moment. 



Forgive me, but I really think that Amanda's post is quite improper
and way out of line under the new regime around here.  Debbie's Prime
Directive unilaterally decided that there will be a Liaison and
decided it will be Abigail.  Then Debbie wrote, "As such, this is not
a forum for discussion of MEG issues, and issues of that type raised
here will not be discussed by MEG."

So, no, I don't think it is proper for MEG members to discuss MEG
matters here at all *ever,* if I understand the Prime Directive
properly.  

Abigail, did I get that right?  If I did, would Abigail let the FAQ
members know what will be done about Amanda's *second* violation 
of the Prime Directive (the first being her ADMIN about the emergency
security precautions to make sure the FAQ members wouldn't delete
their own list)?

This seems to be a pretty important thing to nail down now that the
Prime Directive has established a pecking order here on the FAQ list.
 IMHO, Amanda can no sooner claim to speak as a non-MEG than I can
claim to speak as a MEG.  

And frankly, we're going to get our feet *hopelessly* tangled up under
us if MEGs keep whipping their MEG hats on and off and saying this or
that.  That compelling need for clarity, I understood, was the reason
we have Abigail to serve all of us FAQ-only members.

Cindy -- also requesting that Abigail answer each of her questions
individually