 |
 |
I'm with Chris on this. Given her history as list manager, there's no reason to doubt Anny's judgment, and it seems clear that there's b/c communication behind the decision that she can't reveal for reasons of confidentiality. Very few poeple have been removed from the list--it takes a lot of provocation to earn that distinction. Note that only a very few voices are involved in this discussion. Best on to other things. Mark At 12:59 PM 12/23/2007, you wrote: ><snip> >and that you'd try so desperately to not answer The Question so many of us >have straightforwardly asked you for. [JP] ><snip> > >Judy and others: > >It seems to me that you dislike what has been done, not that you're asking a >question. > >The action you now seek, the 'answer' you'd prefer, would certainly >satisfy some; but it would thereby dissatisfy others who would then want >their 'question' answered... And so on, like Swift's fleas. > >Concentrating upon personalised issues of this sort throttles real >discussion (about poetry and the ETCs) in favour of futile and rebarbative >exchanges about perceived scandals and email hanging chads. Peter Cudmore's >mother put it both earlier than I did and much better, but my point is hers >in its essence. > >There are just three realistic options, in other words, and only those >three: (a) get used to the action taken, let the 'question' drop and >contribute to the List in ways that may attract both new and former members; >(b) leave the List, or else (c) destroy it from within. > >I hope you will choose the first. > >CW >_______________________________________________ > >'The Question >has destroyed you.' >(Neruda)