DoxN4cer said:
Where you a stand-up philosopher in another life, Rich?
One can find the negative where ever one looks, especially when you're really looking for it. Once found, it spreads like a contagion.
I'm as CTFO'ed as they come, my friend; no beer necessary.
It doesn't matter who promoted the first seniors, or how they came to be the first. This sort of questioning is a closed loop of rhetoric. It does't lead anywhere or to anything truly productive, just more rhetoric and discontent.
I know what you're getting at Rich, but I feel that you contradict yourself in you're above statements. The two questions you posed are in opposition of the statement that follows them. Going by the philosophy that is posed in those questions you could declare yourself a GM and start handing out rank diplomas. And why not? After all, who promoted the guy that promoted you? What gave him the authority to do so? And so on. It's ridiculous.
There needs to be (and is) a set of standards that guide certain protcols. Please realize that these are simply customary (and ethical) guidelines for modern practitioners of martial arts. There isn't much you can do if someone chooses to operate outside of these guidelines besides talk about ot and find some kind of common ground, but once the rhetoric starts common ground is lost.
Tim Kashino
Other lives I have lived, may have an impact on how I write. I do not deny it
Ethical and guidelines are all good. Who apoints the leader of a country. Som are kings, and hereditary, others were done by religion, others were done y the strongest man, others were dome in a republic way where the people have representatives choose a leader such as a Prime Minister or even in our case the electorate college. In the PM case those are elected representatives or chosen representatives depending upon the culture. In the case of President, the people vote, and then the electorate college votes. This is representation of the people choosing their leader. Then the leader can assign rank or promote people as (s)he sees fit. Politcal appointments are under review of the new leader, yet the military appointments other than positions such as Joint Chiefs, are not under review of the next new leader. It was and is assumed that those promoted in those ranks had meet the criteria for the new rank and had the respect of their peers and or supperiors or they would not have been received by their new peers. Yet the leader that signs off on the promotion recommendation and the Congress that approves the promotion of said officers are representatives of the people. They were put into place to represent them. So, those Juniors who have no rank and no understanding of the military are the ones signing off and approving the ranks of the officers of the military. Yet, with each new Congress every two years, they do not review each and every officer. They wait for the recommendations of the Military and the and the President, aka Commander and Chief and thereby head of the military, before the approve them. So, our senior most ranks down to that of Ensign or Lieutenant, are approved by the non military, before it is offical, otherwise it is just a field promotion of FRWOC'd. The senior promotions many times are politcal as well, yet they are also based upon skill and capabilities of the people involved.
So, even though my questiosn may disagree with the statements I made it does not mean the statements were not what I beleived in. The questions were to get you and others to think.
Hence my original question: Why ask it in the first place? Those who fall into the seniors must promote versus those who fall into the organization can elect or promote a leader, have their beliefs. and are not likely to change their minds. And it will drive people to make thier rhetoric posts, and statements of faith and belief. Not everyone will be made happy or even satisfactory.
I did not mean it in a negative manner to question you. I was curious as to your reasoning. i.e. Some grow just from the experience of asking the question. Others grow from debating the question. Others can grow from just listenting to the different points of view, even though they be rhetoric. For in understanding who others think you begin to understand the person themself.
Best Regards
:asian:
