On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Stephen Cook wrote:
<Perhaps Councillors voted to close the list because they disapprove of
<some of the comments made on it.
This discussion has been running, on and off, for some time. Yet, no one
seems to have explained what Cilip's objection to the List is (other than
Steve's hypothesis above).
If Cilip has no ownership of the list, and if it exists as a forum for
discussions either about Cilip or else on topics of relevance to Cilip
members, what possible objection can there be?
There are important issues here of relevance to all information
professionals, regarding freedom of speech and censorship.
I am not, of course, suggesting that Cilip has any untoward intentions
towards this List. Nevertheless, as many of you will know, there have been
a number of recent cases whereby organisations have forced the closure of
discussion lists through bullying tactics. We all need to be wary.
Such lists are often run on a shoe-string by people with good intentions,
but no money with which to defend themselves. For example: a
Cheshire-based travel company has done this several times when holiday
list discussants have said things they didn't like (in a non-libellous
manner); Transport for London apparently had a list closed after
criticisms of its policies were made on it.
Surely, communities of practice are irrelevant if users of the List wish
it to be maintained?
Ralph
|