dls wrote:You are right that this is a question resolved first by looking at the constitution. That is the bit which everyone has signed up for.
At the same time, a sense of proportion is better held onto on everybody's part. He may very well be better setting up his own 'comunity group' where he is welcome.
Hairyloon wrote:Except that an association for the community of a stated area ought to be for all members of that community: they cannot exclude the freaks and the weirdos just because they do not like them.
shootist wrote:But what would 'freaks and weirdos' be able to usefully contribute to any such group? This assumes that 'freaks and weirdos' are not defined just as people who's opinions differ from the majority of the community.
dls wrote:There has to be a constitution. If none has been written down, heaven help you all.
There are some people living within communities who will never do anything but leave a mess. Yes, a group should try to be open, but the possibility should be accepted that you are better off without some people.
On the other hand, such people are often the ones who 'sink to the top' of a group.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest