Can't resist a mischievous impulse to allude to The Fugs by way of
countering David's Golden Bard Retirement Home prognostications with the
information that we've acquired quite a few new members in the past couple
of weeks, some of whom I suspect of having joined to get a look at the
archives--but then stayed. And who can blame them, the way the joint's been
jumping on topic lately?
Candice
P.S. If you missed The Fugs allusion, you're probably too young for this
list.
on 8/9/01 6:43 PM, david.bircumshaw at [log in to unmask] wrote:
> Further to my below and previous, this group I attend (or one of them) -
> whose governing committee are not described as a comparison to this list's
> minders btw ! - had similar problems with disruptive characters, a la
> certain personages, and its reaction was to start keeping itself 'within the
> family', with the result that a once diverse and flowing meeting of like and
> unlike is ossifying into an ageing and and increasingly sparse population,
> which will probably soon dissolve altogether.
>
> The locked archives I think are a wise move for the present, but I'd be
> saddened to see it always so.
>
> Best
>
> Dave
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "david.bircumshaw" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 11:19 PM
> Subject: Re: archive
>
>
>> I'm inclined similarly to the notion of the archives being locked only as
> a
>> temporary measure, particularly as all groups need to maintain themselves
> by
>> being open to outside renewal. A poetry workshop I've attended for a
> decade
>> is both ageing and declining because its governing committee's
>> disinclination to let it be known to the 'wrong sort'.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Dave
|