This strikes me as incredibly wrong-headed. A list is not a public
space--it has an owner. We are invited in pending good behavior, defined in
this case in very liberal terms. If you've been lurking for any length of
time you must have noticed more than a few flare-ups that were allowed to
resolve themselves, and the range of positions on virtually all issues that
have been raised is rather broad.
Kent has been invited off UB and I believe Subsub. I don't know if your
infinitely tolerant list has been confronted with members who think that
disrupting lists is an art form. It would be interesting to know how it
would deal with that sort of situation.
As to human kindness, I'm not sure its exercise is the primary function of
a discussion list. As in many other situations we forego therapy in order
to get something done.
Mark
At 09:01 PM 7/22/2001 -0700, David Hickman wrote:
>I do not usually post on the lists I subscribe to, but the Kent Johnson flap
>has drawn me out of my customary silence. Having followed Mr. Johnson on
>three lists (UB Poetics, Subsubpoetics and now Poetry Etc.) god knows I am
>no fan of his tireless baiting of anyone and everyone who can be drawn into
>his volatility and insecurity. But I have decided to unsubscribe from this
>list, not because of Kent Johnson, (I know how to use a delete key) but
>because of the willingness of the list "management" to silence him.
>
>A list of this kind is bound to attract personalities that are difficult. It
>cannot be any other way. For people who run a list to pretend that they are
>only responsible to those who fit their picture of what a list should look
>like is disingenuous. Their decision to take on such an unpredictable and
>potentially irritating task has consequences for everyone who subscribes.The
>kind of responsibility that is called for cannot be said to have been met
>when one person is sacrificed (Ms. Croggin's recent words to Erminia on this
>word echo with heavy irony here) for the good of the rest, since there is
>only exclusivity at the expense of human kindness in such an outcome. I am
>on at least one list where people view it as a personal failure if they
>cannot endure this kind of thing and solve it without recourse to
>censorship. They are right.
>
>David Hickman
>
>
>on 7/22/01 3:51 PM, [log in to unmask] at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
>> Anthony asked:
>>
>>> did Kent unsubscribe or was he removed? I'm not clear on this.
>>
>> Kent was removed at the discretion of the list owners, after his postings
>> were placed under review (which meant that they went to us first before
>> being distributed to the list). Kent was aware he was under review, as a
>> notice goes to any subscriber whose settings are altered in this way.
>> These actions were taken for reasons obvious to the list and others which
>> will not be. Neither Candice nor I have any intention of entering a
>> torturous and time-wasting discussion on who said what to whom.
>>
>> Now, on with the show!
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Alison
>
|