[Sosfbay-discuss] Jim Stauffer's pattern of UNGreen, tyranous offensive, high-handed behavior

[Drew Johnson]

No No Jim. You got that entirely backwards.  Caroline deserves THE RESPECT
as a Couunty Council member which you just deprived her of. Though you
also have not been on the Council for many years, we TRY to give you
respect DESPITE your OUTRAGEOUS OUTBURSTS OF ANGER WHICH HAVE DRIVEN MANY
ACTIVISTS AWAY FROM OUR PARTY.  While you are currently serving as our
Regional Rep to the Coordinating Committee none of this gives you
justification to operate as a tin plated dictator in this way.

Since YOU are the one taking the completely ungreen, rageaholic, tyranous,
abusive censorious, exclusionary, arbitrary, unilateral, high handed and
unreasonable action YOU ARE THE ONE WHO NEEDS TO EXPLAIN TO EVERYONE why
you think that you have the right to knock a County Council emeritus
member off the list for posting about news of vital interest to Green in
the region.

IMO, instead of subjecting us all to these periodically terrorizing angry
outbursts that Jim indulges himself in and sprays everyone around himself
in, Jim Stauffer needs to get himself to anger management classes ASAP and
take a timeout from party work to get his head straightened out about
treating others with respect and dignity.  Its a matter of taking personal
responsibility for his own behavior.  How many people have been driven
away from this party over the years by Jim personally would be difficult
to guess.  While he provides much knowledge from having been at key
positions over the years Jim's extremely ungreen behavior entirely
detracts from the value he'd otherwise be able to provide.  Let him get
himself together so that he can operate as a real Green rather than a
madman and THEN he will be well enough to fully contribute.

Jim's archnemesis, Mike Feinstein recently took himself mostly out of the
state party mix.  Jim would do very well to do the same.  It would do him,
the GPCA AND the GPSC a WORLD OF GOOD.  We should not be subjected to the
factional fanaticism that the factional alphas like Jo Chamberlain, Peter
Camejo, on the one side of the factional divide or Mike Feinstein on the
other OR their their loyal foot soldiers like Jim Stauffer (of the Jo
Chamberlain/ Peter Camejo faction) that keep that fire alive.

EVERYONE GET THIS:  The post that Jim knocked me off after was the one
about McKinney's choice for VP running mate, Rosa Clemente!!!!  The post I
was about to put on was an official GP-US release describing our new
nominee, Cynthia McKinney and her running mate.  I was AT THE CONVENTION,
TRYING TO PROVIDE CURRENT NEWS TO OUR REGION!!!  HELLO!!! Jim's behavior
is just out of control IMO.

I'm sorry, but Jim's is the one completely confused about what constitutes
items of interest and concern to Greens across the region.

EVERYONE GET THIS: The volume on the list in question is a trickle!!!  Its
hardly used at all!!!  This is a completely in Stauffer's head-only
artificial situation due to Jim's amazingly cramped interpretation of what
is of interest to Green in the regional

I'm thinking that Jim may have altered the list's purpose statement
recently because i seem to recall it was longer, broader and more
inclusive previously. But whether or not this is the case, here's what it
says today:

http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm

"This list is to facilitate communications between SC and SM counties on
regional issues."

Notice this says NOTHING about it being County Council ONLY business or
that ONLY County Council members can post.  Notice it gives no
restrictions (nor should it) as to how.  Notice it does not say that Jim
Stauffer is the definer of ANYTHING, or that he has the authority to
suddenly, arbitrarily and with prejuce boot County Councilor emeritus
members off the list (it doesn't even assert that he has ANYTHING TO DO
WITH THE LIST WHATSOVER).

Jim seems to want to treat the SC-SM list as if it were the Red Phone,
connecting the White House to the Kremlin, only to be used in the direst
of emergencies.  Or as a fire that you have to break the glass in order to
use.  The SC-SM list is treated as if it were so precious it just can
never be used.  Rubbish!!!  Our party resources NEED to be exercised in
order to actually make a difference.  Duh!

Here's what I say:

When our region needs to mobilize to run our races as we do with our
presidential race, ITS REGIONAL BUSINESS.  When we need to talk about how
we run Carol Brouillet's race (in the 14th district which spans both San
Mateo and Santa Clara county) its regional business.  Heck Barry
Hermanson's and Peter Myer's run to some smaller extent is regional
business.

When we need to organize civil rights actions (including impeachment) we
need to communicate it across the whole region.

When we have events we want both county member's to participate in, such
as Tian's parties, its regional business.  Several SM members joined us at
the last, fun and wonderful election night party at Tian's.  Note that Jim
was not a participant.

This SM-SC list is for COMMUNICATION, not to hamper, construct, censor
communication.  I received a number of private e-mails previously re: the
posts I'd put up on the SC-SM list by people who felt intimidated by the
wrathful Jim Stauffer and so didn't want to expose themselves to his
abusive wrath.  IF PEOPLE DO NOT WISH TO READ A POSTING THEY MAY SIMPLY
IGNORE IT OR HIT THE DELETE BUTTON.  THEY DO NOT NEED TO TRY TO DICTATE TO
OTHERS HOW TO COMMUNICATE.


Green is Connection!

Drew Johnson
County Council Emeritus and Delegate to the Green National Committee
(among many, many other contributions)


On Mon, July 14, 2008 19:40, Jim Stauffer wrote:
> Caroline -
>
> Since you are County Councilor you need to explain your accusation of
> "esclusion and censorship."
>
> Specifically, how is it censorship when anyone who wants to read Drew's
> post
> can do so on this list? No one on the other list asked him to copy his
> messages there and no one has complained about his removal.
>
> If you want to make a claim of exclusion, then you'll have to make that
> claim against most of the lists in the state party. Most lists are
> "closed"
> lists for committees or some other specialized purpose. The membership is
> controlled by the list members themselves, and general discussion topics
> are
> not allowed. Such is the list from which Drew was removed.
>
> As a person who now holds a position of responsibility in this
> organization, please explain how this is exclusion and censorship. Those
are strong accusations.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> Caroline Yacoub wrote:
>> I thought the Green Party was about inclusion and operating on the best
>> information available, not esclusion and censorship. Anyone who doesn't
>> want to read Drew's e-mails has only to delete them. Green is choice.
>> Caroline