At 18:32 10/06/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Dea Paul Mackintosh,
>I recommend active participation in discussions on this mailbase before
>suggesting that everyone else be involved in such discussions.  I
>prefer to log into this list partly because it is a manageable size, and
>so the exchange tends to be focused.
>
>10 Jun 1997, Paul Mackintosh wrote:
>
>> It strikes me that this mailbase, though tremendously worthwhile, is
>> dominated by the same names coming up over and over again, at least in
>> the archives. It's good to have active correspondents, but might this
>> indicate that there are too few readers/users?
>> 
>> I don't remember seeing this mailbase advertised at the Poetry Society
>> Web site or on any other of the novice/first time outer's easy ways in
>> to the poetic Web. I recommend wider advertising, even if only of
>> Richard Caddel's Basil Bunting Centre, to get a truly representative
>> cross-section of opinion.
>> 
>
>
These two postings have at last provided me with the jolt I needed to sit
down and think about why I remain a subscriber to this group. I have been a
"lurker", except for a couple of back-channel queries, since I signed on
about seven months ago.
I often find the postings annoying because of the very frequent assumption
that "everyone" knows what is being talked about, and consequent
abbreviations or "in-talk". - I am not referring to the exchanges of
opinion, but to advertisements for readings that do not give full details -
I remember reading one (I think it was for Sub Voicive) which simply said
"usual venue". Or something like that. I have certainly felt as if I am
watching in on someone else's event/diary many a time and while in itself
this is not necessarily entirely a bad thing, it has, for me, had a knock on
effect of timidity in terms of joining in. 
The impression given is that there are a group of active correspondents who
all know each other and who arrange  events  which most of them then attend.
To interject on the maillist with another opinion, or a question, or
advertisement for poetry, readings, books events, etc, would be considered
an affront - Paul Mackintosh's two postings have hardly been greeted with
civility, have they ? He may or may not be bumptious in promoting his own
work and his own opinions on the mailbase in his first couple of postings,
but part of the appeal of mailbase groups is, as he says, a cross-section of
opinion. To see a new subscriber open the cyberspace equivalent of his mouth
and be bombarded with derisive asides is hardly encouraging !
This group is cliquey, excluding those not "in the know"; one small example;
- I still don't really know what Sub Voicive is - is it sheets of paper, or
a place, or a concept, or an umbrella term ? And part of the reason I have
never asked is the very "closedness" of the maillist that is reflected from
the manner in which the principal's exchanges are conducted. 
My impression is that apart from Richard Caddel (Durham) "everyone" lives in
either Cambridge or London. All the events publicised are, as far as I can
tell, either in London or Cambridge (with the exception of the recent
posting advertising Brossart in Leeds). Is this true, or are there a number
of other subscribers running/performing/reading/attending poetry events (as
I am) in other parts of the country who don't feel that this is a genuinely
open space for publicising such information ?
So why do I remain a subscriber ? Well, because I find things of interest
written here, of course, particularly when there is active discussion about
ways of writing (of which I would like to see more, and a broader spectrum
of thought). Also because I am an optimist, and hope the group will grow
into something a little less self-reflexive (and at times it certainly does,
again in the thoughtful considerations of various poetic practices).
I have two questions - one to the "regulars" and one to the "silents"
firstly to the vocal regulars - At you I have levelled a charge of being
cliquey, possessive, and unfriendly. I am pointing a finger at you as an
homogenous group, but I'd be interested in hearing how open you, as
individuals, really want this group to be - Fiona Templeton's point about
manageability and focus is desperately important, but has this group swung
too far into closedness ?
secondly to the silents - If there is a disparity between the amount of
involvement you have in this maillist and the amount  you would like to
contribute, why is this  ?
Yours, in a fairly honest spirit of enquiry,
Helen F.



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%