In Reply to: Re: IBM Censorhip and worse on this board? posted by Systems Assurance on 11 July 2004 at 00:46:45:
: Why does Mr Harris not give his email address?
It seems to me that he, like you and many others, doesn't want to give it. Neither he nor you have to and that seems perfectly reasonable. So what is the point you are making.
: What exactly is his point?
I'm left with the very clear impression that he is saying that he thinks the board is being censored at times other than when Alan sticks up a censorship notice. That's how I read it.
: How is this relevant to IBM Defined Benefit pensions?
Probably your strongest point but I would be very concerned if IBM in any form had infiltrated this board. What's infiltration? I would say undue influence, and in IBM's particular case I would say that is any influence at all. They have considerable power and can damage employees and retirees - don't forget that.
So if one of the directing group were beholden to IBM that would be a very serious concern indeed. Such I can see might well first be indicted by censorship that served IBM.
Members have to be vigilant for the members of the directing group conniving with the enenmy, and the directing group can't object to that scrutiny, nor will they unless they have got something to hide. They have got to be whiter than white. No business with IBM. No financial problems where they might be open to a bung. Members, who place their trust in them, have a right to that comfort.
Just some ideas. What do you think?