I posted it for the record, as I have been misrepresented by Randolph
and Ian. I expect no one to comment or respond to it. Indeed, I don’t
want any responses.
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:53:22 +1100, Alison Croggon
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I'm not a list manager or anything, but as I recall, there is a
>guideline that says disputes on other lists should not be brought to
>this one.
>
>A
>
>On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 7:07 AM, Jeffrey Side <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>> This may be of interest to those of you who are also on the British
and
>> Irish Poets List.
>>
>> Due to reasons that have not been explained to me, I have been
>> banned from the British and Irish Poets List. I am at a loss to see
why
>> this has happened. The list managers in their email notifying me of
this
>> banning failed to tell me exactly why, mentioning only that I had
>> made ‘speculative attacks’—against whom or what has been
omitted.
>> Here is the email:
>>
>>
>> Dear Jeffrey,
>>
>> Due to your repeated, unsubstantiated and entirely speculative
attacks,
>> in accordance with list rules you have been removed from the British
>> and Irish Poetry List.
>>
>> Your sincerely,
>>
>> Randolph Healy
>> Ian Davidson
>>
>>
>> If by that they are referring to my posts on the Oxford Professor of
>> Poetry elections, then I can’t see those as meriting my banning.
Anyone
>> is free to view these posts, and if they do they will see that I said
>> nothing like the portrayal of them by the list managers.
>>
>> Perhaps they are referring to one of the following comments I
>> attempted to post but for some reason didn’t appear (presumably
>> vetted). I will leave it to you to judge for yourselves if I said
anything
>> in them meriting the ban:
>>
>> In response to Jamie Mckendrick regarding the Oxford Professor of
>> Poetry elections:
>>
>> “Ideally, the electoral rules and procedures you mention should
prevail,
>> but we are both old enough to suspect that given the potential for
>> favouritism (and the politics of poetry seems to operate on this
basis)
>> such transparency could be jeopardised."
>>
>> In response to Jamie Mckendrick regarding the Oxford Professor of
>> Poetry elections
>>
>> “When Heaney held the post, most of his lectures concerned
>> themselves with defending the sort of poetic styles that his own
poetry
>> relied on. So the post seems to have the potential to enable the
>> particular poet holding the position to use it as a platform for
apologia
>> for their poetry. And because most of those likely to hold the
position
>> will be those who write mainstream poetry, the pedagogical process
of
>> disseminating the virtues of such poetry publically will continue. By
the
>> way, the same would also be true if an “avant-garde” poet held the
>> post. Given this, I see no reason for the post to exist.”
>>
>> In response to Robin Hamilton regarding the Oxford Professor of
Poetry
>> elections
>>
>> “I don’t see such a sharp contradiction as you do, Robin. I didn’t
>> actually say the thing had been “fixed”, though that was perhaps the
>> inference (which I have apologised for) I gleaned from Stevenson’s
>> quote. I merely suggested that she might know something about
any
>> behind-the-scenes machinations that went on. I certainly didn't
claim
>> that I knew about such, also. Perhaps I shouldn’t have used the
>> word “fixed” in my apology, as it was not a word I used in my
original
>> post, and has obviously misled you as to what I did say.”
>>
>> My apologies for burdening you with this, but it is merely for the
record.
>> I tried to get this forwarded to the list itself, but the list managers
>> intercepted it and rebuked the person who had tried to forward it for
me-
>> -so much for democracy and free speech.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Editor, Masthead: http://www.masthead.net.au
>Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
>Home page: http://www.alisoncroggon.com
|