Hi5 said: "With respect, the people who are willing to pledge aren't going to be the ones who are troublemakers anyway. A pledge here from a troublemaker isn't worth the paper it's written on."
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
____________________________________________
I understand what you're saying, Hi5, and agree that a dishonest agreement means nothing ... but, I say (with the same respect for you) that the value of such a pledge is not in securing the reform of "troublemakers," but rather in cementing the solidarity of those who agree on the foundations of respectful exchange between members.
Our US Constitution is a good example; the signatures of dishonest rabblerousers wouldn't have signified anything ... but the collective agreement of those who meant what they said stood for a great deal, and still does today.
Our little "document" pales in comparison; but such efforts are nonetheless important! Union advances the cause.
As we assume you agree in principle, then, I'll sign you up by proxy:
Hi5