[Peace-discuss] covert political positions

[Bob Illyes]

Wow, this is good. I'll have to keep an eye out for these covert
political operators. There's nothing covert about my differences
with Carl- on Obama, for example. We've had plenty of open
disagreements, mostly about effective political methods and the
hazards of over-simplifying issues, to such an extent that I suspect
some folks would like us to just cool it.

Carl's article is a completely different matter. All I care about
as an editor is that he presents his case as well as possible given
our space constraints. It's his name on the article, not mine, after all.
I don't think this qualifies as a "covert political position".

Folks who are bothered by consensus-based editing should avoid
submitting articles to the Public i, because they will find us very
annoying. Here is my comment on Carl's article sent that I sent to
the Print list (the subject was whether or not to publish the article):

  "I'm willing to go with the article as is with the one paragraph
  about Clinton removed for lack of factual support. He presents
  important material, and argues it well.

  Any other opinions?"

Note that this is a part of a conversation looking for consensus, and
that absolutely nowhere did I say I thought we should do this without
clearing it with Carl. The notion that I should be sued for having an
opinion is preposterous.

Bob