[LAF] LAF2

[Joy Wood]

Yeh, I agree with what Justin says and what Steve says.  I do not think 
there was any slight intended to Steve by picking a first and third Saturday 
instead of something more convenient for Steve.  I think it was a case of 
picking anything at all and going with it, instead of just emailing back and 
forth and back and forth and ending up with no meetings arranged at all.  
Having said that, the dates chosen ARE less convenient for Steve so how 
about, since Ed has only booked 3 September so far, if Ed books FP for 23 
September and thereafter for the rest of the year we go for the 2nd and 4th 
Saturdays???  And Steve can pick some Fridays for meeting at the Overdraught 
or RFH???


>From: justin <hooper_jackson at yahoo.com>
>To: LAF LIST <laf at lists.aktivix.org>
>Subject: Re: [LAF] LAF2
>Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 06:54:50 -0700 (PDT)
>
>"I think the whole group would greatly suffer with out
>me..."
>
>i think it's a great shame that what Steve says is true
>here, yet he himself was the one who had to say it!
>Anyone remember mutual support/solidarity, etc.?
>
>(not sure if Steve was being self deprecatingly
>ironic by saying this, i don't think he was, and i think what
>he says is true, and yet, to repeat, no one else
>said it!)
>
>i mean the point is that Steve is one of the few ppl
>who's been a regualar over the past nth years, and also
>contributed to talks and the running of discussions...
>and also has a good base in anarchist politics...
>- there is not really anyone else who fits all these
>LAF credentials within LAF!...
>
>i think having regulars is good, and also having a reasonable
>base within anarchism is good, too... Outreach is important
>as well,
>but not to the detriment of destroying the anarchist base
>which is the point of the thing in the first place... I mean
>you need a sturdy, sustainable base to outreach in the first place!
>
>So, i think publicity should be first and foremost directed inwards
>towards anarchists and anti-authoritarians...
>A question to ask is why has the LAF apparently shrunk over recent years?
>(Well since the late 90's as far as i can tell - i seem to remember
>hearing that some primitivists became regualars - did that put everyone 
>else
>off?! Maybe 1 or 2 peripherally involved individuals effectively
>put ppl off around that time too?)...
>
>(Maybe
>any general outward publicity is no bad thing - you'll only
>get a few ppl here and there from the various hopefully
>diverse sectors you're putting your publicity in - altho i
>think the more diverse the advertising the better
>- you don't want to rely on one or 2 sources...)
>
>Have not caught up with the other posts yet - so will go thru them...
>But thought i should really respond to this post...
>
>Justin
>
>--- steve ash <steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Not very happy with current developments now I've had
> > time to think about them. As one of the last real
> > anarchists left in the LAF, I can only think of two
> > other regular attendees, I'm not really happy at all
> > with the present ideas now I think about it and I
> > think the whole group would greatly suffer with out
> > me, though I still have plans of my own. If the
> > meetings were on the 2nd and 4th of each month or
> > something and started at 2pm rather than 3pm I might
> > be able to attend on at least a monthly basis. As it
> > is the LAF is already isolated from the anarchist
> > movement and I'd rather work on a project that brought
> > an anarchist discussion group closer into the
> > mainstream of the anarchist movement.
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>LAF mailing list
>LAF at lists.aktivix.org
>http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf