OK, its raining and so my mood isn't the best, but on any other mailing list
someone would have noticed (not least the sender) that a personal message had
been sent to the list. Is anyone actually reading this list?
Cornelius made a number of attempts to start discussion in the autumn, which
got nowhere. And then there have been a few announcements. There was more discussion
on Britarch when Bourdieu died!
It occurs to me that there could be something in all this. Is Archaeolgical
Theory so fragmented that its not possible to talk to a 'group' about it? Do
we need to know who we are talking to before we can have a useful discussion?
Or is it because mailing lists and internet discussion are the domain of students,
the public and other people with time on their hands - and these people aren't
interested in Archaeological Theory
I am not prepared to accept the 'busy' argument, since it takes about 2 minutes
to read the entire archive of this list in 2002.
Is there an arch theory mailing list, and if so why?
Sarah
>Dear Victor Vetrov
>
>Please send me the exact information on the East Ukraine University
>publication of my article on Celtic drinking. I would like to refer
>to it and do not know how to cite it ...
>
>Many thanks
>
>Constanze
>
>--
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Constanze Witt, PhD
>UT Austin Classics Dept.
>WAG 17 C3400
>Austin, TX 78712
>512 471 8684
>fax 512 471 4111
>http://www.utexas.edu/depts/classics/
>
>
*************************** ADVERTISEMENT ******************************
For ALL the latest Soccer news on your club, GAA sports results and the
latest on your F1 stars plus much more check out
http://sport.iol.ie/sport. Sport On-Line.... It's a passion
|