Good enough.  Your books went out by slow mail yesterday--let me know when
they get there.

Mark


At 11:28 AM 4/22/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>Well, Mark, I'll consider your remarks here. Though I had no intent in
>baiting David, perhaps it had that effect. I wasn't aware that you had
>been on the list such a long time, but, even so, I think that the list
>would have been better and richer for David's posts if the abuse could
>have been weeded out of them.
>
>I disagree though about a cessation of a few days making a difference.
>There _were_ a number of periods of cessation from this thread, many of
>them lasting for several days to a week (when Alison requested it go b/c
>several weeks ago, when Geoffrey suggested that we all post poems and make
>comments, which everyone participated in, and which I followed with the
>url on my Vallejo translations, etc). A look at the archives will bear
>this out, and that in each case, the issue would be re-introduced to the
>list by David.
>
>No, that's just my comment, I don't see why it should be  perceived as
>provocative. I just noticed when I read the list of banned persons that
>there was not a woman among them. I think the shift in gender may be part
>of the change that Robin notes. That's all.
>
>As for flame wars, you can count me out.
>
>Best,
>
>
>
>Best,
>
>Rebecca
>
>Rebecca Seiferle
>www.thedrunkenboat.com
>
>
>-------Original Message-------
>From: Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: 04/22/03 06:16 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: David Bircumshaw
>
> >
> > I'm sorry, Rebecca, but I think that your attempts at reason were a form of
>baiting.  You also seemed incapable of letting it go. Simple cessation
>would have done the trick after a few days.
>
>What exactly do you mean by "it's perhaps not insignificant that of those
>banned, there is not a woman among them." Is this meant to be provocative?
>
>You're new enough to the list that you probably aren't aware what the loss
>has been.
>
>God, I hope this doesn't set a new flame war going. Suffice it that I feel
>as Robin does.
>
>Mark
>
>
>At 10:48 AM 4/22/2003 -0600, you wrote:
> >How about sad and regrettable but necessary? Some might think, given my
> >having argued with David so passionately and exactingly, that I am glad
>to
> >see him gone. I am not. I still wish that this would not have been
> >necessary. I wouldn't have gone to so much trouble, trying to ardently
> >reason with him to stop, if I hadn't hoped that he would stop and that he
> >could continue to contribute to the list.
> >
> >I am reminded of Janis Joplin saying "all I really need is someone to
>tell
> >me when to stop." However, in this case, there were many appeals to
> >stop,  and no stopping.
> >
> >Of those that you mentioned as banned, I know of three of the cases,
> >either from the present or from the archives, and in each case, the three
> >parties refused basically to stop. Marcus said he intended to keep
>abusing
> >Gabe, and Kent long ago, and David in the present, seemed unable to stop
> >themselves. Basically these were all issues of abuse and harassment,
>where
> >the person engaging in such behavior refused to stop. I am aware that
>this
> >is not how they view it, but that's part of the moderation and evaluation
> >that the listowner does.
> >
> >I do think that the list is changing. There have been a large influx of
> >new members, and it's perhaps not insignificant that of those banned,
> >there is not a woman among them, and that a good part of the argument
>here
> >has been between an old male member of the list with certain expectations
> >of entitlement and a new female member of the list with certain
> >expectations that another woman should not be subjected to personal
> >harassment because she wants to talk about poetry.
> >
> >And, well, there are different ways of looking at self-censorship. I
>think
> >you should consider what you say, in a general way at least.  I always
> >_do_ consider what I say, in terms of its reason and logic, in terms of
> >the issue involved, that's not self-censorship, that's the necessary
> >self-governing to engage in relationship in almost any forum. I haven't
> >said anything personally abusive to David in this long continually
> >ressurrected thread and have on many occasions in the discussion pointed
> >out that I was replying to his posts and poems, to what he said here,
> >though perhaps in a more exacting and passionate way than most or than he
> >could bear. He never made similar statements or provisos to me: even my
> >having written to him cordially and having invited him to send work was
> >used in a post as an example of, I guess, what was supposed to be my
> >hypocrisy and dishonesty. That's a first by the way that I've ever had
> >anyone use an invitation to send work as a way to make a point about what
> >a bad person I must be!
> >
> >I share Liz's hope expressed in her recent post that this becomes once
> >again a community for the positive and mutually supportive discussion of
> >poetry and issues related to poetics.
> >
> >Best,
> >
> >Rebecca
> >
> >Rebecca Seiferle
> >www.thedrunkenboat.com
> >
> >-------Original Message-------
> >From: Robin Hamilton <[log in to unmask]>
> >Sent: 05/08/02 03:49 PM
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Re: David Bircumshaw
> >
> > >
> > > > I have removed David from the list.
> > >
> > > Randolph
> >
> >I'm not quite sure which adjective to chose to describe my reaction to
> >this
> >announcement -- appalled? infuriated? incredulous? gobsmacked? -- I think
> >all would apply.
> >
> >I won't go into particulars, as I don't want to make Randolph's life
> >worse,
> >and he is incredibly self-sacrificing in moderating this list.  And
> >anyway,
> >I'm sure everyone will be able to infer how I feel and what I might say,
> >so
> >why repeat myself?
> >
> >But there are some general issues involved around this latest expulsion.
> >
> >Whether fairly or not, it does seem to have reached the stage on
>poetryetc
> >where it's difficult to know what is allowed to be said and what isn't.
>I
> >entirely agree that there should be bounds -- no personal abuse, and the
> >no-racism no-sexism rules I have no problem with.  But what bothers me
> >over
> >what's been happening recently is two things.  One is that the bounds of
> >what is allowed to be said are tightening.  The other is that the rules
> >don't seem to be being applied evenly -- some people seem to be allowed
>to
> >say things, without comment, that get others publicly chastised.
> >
> >This may be a misperception on my part, but it's certainly what I feel,
> >and
> >one result is that before I write any post to poetryetc now, I go through
> >a
> >process of self-censorship.  Uncomfortable.  This didn't use to be the
> >case.
> >
> >We have been here before.  The Buffalo bannings in 98 might or might not
> >have been legitimate, or more or less so in some cases than in others,
>but
> >the +effective+ result was that the list was gutted, and turned from the
> >most lively poetry list on the Net into the pathetic ghost of its former
> >self that it is now.
> >
> >I don't want to see poetryetc go the same way.  Partly out of pure
> >selfishness, as it's the poetry list I feel most at home on.
> >
> >But may I run through a list of names that in the not-so-far-past have
> >been
> >kicked off poetryetc, sometimes for quite justifiable reasons?  And
> >occasionally (and this still seems to me to be somewhat random) later
> >reinstated.
> >
> >Kent Johnson
> >David Hess
> >Richard Dillon
> >Roddy Lumsden
> >Marcus Bales
> >David Bircumshaw.
> >
> >[My apologies to anyone I may have omitted from this list.]
> >
> >To pick one name not entirely at random -- David Hess.
> >
> >David is the ONLY person I ever put on my Blocked Senders list, mostly
> >because I was getting bored out of my skull with the personal abuse he
> >seemed to be directing at me.  I didn't like doing the block, but
>frankly,
> >I'd had enough.
> >
> >So OK, I could solve my personal problem with David Hess by Blocking him.
> >Removing him from the list was another matter.  All I'm trying to say
>with
> >this rather trivial reminiscence is that even in the case of the ONE
> >person
> >I ever Blocked, I was still unhappy about him being dumped from the list.
> >
> >[And I agree, there were other issues involved over that business, mostly
> >the rash of false identities which suddenly hit poetryetc.]
> >
> >Enough.  Probably more than enough.
> >
> >Anyone who still wants to read dave bircumshaw's poems or hear him speak
> >might consult the british-poets list.
> >
> >Robin Hamilton
> > >
> >