 |
 |
Just to respond to this with the results of the 'Gerry' survey so far, it looks like most people agree with Alan. 1) Nothing, I'm happy to receive them/delete them as I receive them 21.2% 61 2) Set up a LIS-Gerry email group for those that wish to subscribe 31.6% 91 3) Gerry should be removed from the LIS-LINK group 47.2% 136 Although I appreciate that the answers are not necessarily mutually exclusive (i.e. it's possible to agree with both 2 & 3- my mistake!), perhaps it would be best for Gerry's freedom of expression if he refrained from emailing the LIS-LINK group, and instead set up his own JISCMAIL list. This would allow discussions about his email threads, and prevent people from sending 'Reply to all' responses which seem to be upsetting others. If anyone else wants to do the survey, it's here: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GerryMcKiernan I'll send the results to the LIS-LINK administrators at the end of the week. -----Original Message----- From: A general Library and Information Science list for news and discussion. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Exelby Alan Mr (LIB) Sent: 10 August 2010 13:49 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: (ll) Scholarship 2.0 Facebook Sorry, I cannot agree; this response itself loses all perspective. No-one is depriving Gerry McK of his right to freedom of expression, but freedom of expression does not require that other people have to pay attention to that expression. To put in the context of the print technologies when these rights were developed: you can print what you like, but no-one else is obliged to buy or read what you say. Given the special conditions for the net, there are special rules, which include the principle that postings to mail lists should be relevant to the topic of the list; and other subscribers are perfectly within their rights to complain about posts they do not believe are within those rules. Trying to frame this in terms of freedom of expression is going way overboard. For myself, I delete his posts unread due to their uncritical technophilia (along with unintelligible postings by other persons), but given the scale of rubbish I receive, I don't find this especially onerous - but there are often far more than "less than 1 a day", and I would certainly be glad to see them stopped. Alan ============================== Mr A.V. Exelby, Systems/Databases Librarian. The Library, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ Tel.: 01603 592432 E-mail: [log in to unmask] Information Services ================================ "Man, who'd have thought being a librarian could be so tough" Seamus Harper, in 'Harper 2.0', "Andromeda". >-----Original Message----- >From: A general Library and Information Science list for news and >discussion. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Kane >Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 12:10 PM >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: (ll) Scholarship 2.0 Facebook > >Agreed. > >I don't like this. > >When herd mentality like this kicks in, tolerance, freedom of >expression and compassion get kicked out. We lose humanity and our >sense of perspective in the hysteria. It's how we fail as a species, >on a bigger scale, with wars and the like. > >The correct perspective is that we are dealing with less than 1 >message per day. > >The correct thing to do is to treat all people with dignity and >respect. > >Thanks, > >David. > > >On 10 August 2010 10:54, Lindsay, John M <[log in to unmask]> >wrote: >> The response to the occasional email from the list owner on Facebook >above fascinates. There is hardly a message a day. I find the bot >who owns the Facebook group responds fairly frequently, and >sufficiently intelligently, that Turing would be impressed. Deleting >messages that you don't want to read, about ten a day on lis-link, is >done easily and collectively in digest mode, it isn't hard work. The >messages on scholarship 2.0 are often telling me something I didn't >know, and occasionally useful or I want to follow them. The same sort >of thing happens on the KIDMM list. This is the first time I've seen >a lis-link thread develop a discussion (these are called discussion >lists for a reason) and I am stunned by parts of the community >committed to freedom of expression and access to information >(1948) responding in a manner of managerialism? >> >> >> At some stage, I presume, in the best tradition of Niemoller, >someone will start a thread about my occasional matters of politics, >gardening, ISKO, PRADSA, concept theory, walking, public transport, >and threads which someone doesn't see the connection with that >particular flavour of lis-linking, such as linked data? >> >> >> I do notice this list is about information science, rather than >services, and to be a science means a particular matter for technical >change. >> >> >> Approaching an employer I find simply scandalous, and unethical. >> >> >> >> >> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email >> Security System. >> > > > >-- >David Kane, MLIS. >Systems Librarian >Waterford Institute of Technology >Ireland >http://library.wit.ie/ >T: ++353.51302838 >M: ++353.876693212