I see, from another back channel response from Joe, that he chooses not to
front channel his previous email message to me. He states, further, that he
had copied it to you and a few other listmembers whose names I have no
reason to reveal.
It seems clear, then, that I must ask you, as co-manager, to begin the
process of requesting, for me, at the least, Joe's voluntary withdrawal from
his position as your co-manager. If no mechanism exists for sucha
procedure, then I request your soliciting suggestions as to its mechanism
from all of the listmembers (i.e., front channel).
I will not accept back channel emails from Joe anymore. As you have not
sent me backchannel messages, I don't feel I need to request the same of
you.
I hope you will understand how important the issue of backchannelling,
politically speaking, is for this list. In the USA we have an "Open
Meetings" law which guarantees all group members access to the proceedings,
deliberations, and decisions made by groups' administrators.
I would hope we could manage this list, at least in spirit, the same way.
We have nothing to hide, after all, and the secrecy is insulting and
disrespectful to me, as well as to all of us.
Judy
2008/7/15 Anny Ballardini <[log in to unmask]>:
> I understand your position, Judy. As I understand your wild spontaneous
> nature. I think that there is no specific request, just that as soon as you
> notice, or others notice that the nature of the messages becomes too
> personal, switch it to b/c.
>
> Once again I thank Joseph Duemer for his patience.
>
> Please accept from us our request to limit personal messages,
> thank you,
>
> Anny
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Judy Prince <[log in to unmask]
> >
> wrote:
>
> > I'm glad, at last, to hear from you. It's always helpful, Anny, to know
> > what folks are thinking. No doubt you could tell from my explanation in
> > calling for Joe's voluntarily giving up his co-managership, that I had no
> > clue as to what, if anything, he had decided on his own or with the
> advice
> > of others. Nor did I have any notion of what other listmembers thought
> of
> > the issues raised in the timeline of what I felt were his dictatorial
> > actions.
> > As always, if there's no voting mechanism in place, and if most of the
> > members of a group, as is almost always the case, choose to remain
> silent,
> > none of us can know what most of us want. I find that frustrating, but
> it
> > apparently is the accepted norm.
> >
> > I feel quite content as a member of this list, recognizing that we are a
> > wonderfully diverse group, comprising many strong personalities, and
> those
> > factors inevitably lead to intense encounters. I see the diversity and
> > personality-strength as pluses----which should be evident to many of you
> in
> > my attempts to keep members from being cut from our list. It's generally
> > my
> > way, and it's not difficult for me to understand and sympathise with
> those
> > who feel the opposite way. But the understanding and sympathy don't stop
> > me
> > from voicing my views and opinions, from having laughs, making and
> > commenting on poetry, and in general, being myself---with the most
> profound
> > wish that others will be themselves and learn what they can from the mix
> > that we are.
> >
> > That said, I see no particular reason to apologise to anyone, Anny. You
> > perhaps feel better, yourself, having stated your reasons for wanting my
> > apologies to be given to Fred and to Joe. Your saying it is at least a
> > step
> > in the right direction: increasing the openness which this list, in my
> > opinion, needs. Openness is a responsibility, not only of the
> > listmanagers,
> > but of every member of the group. It's at once a daunting challenge, and
> a
> > fantastic opportunity. Many might feel that it "gets in the way"---as
> well
> > as so many other things that go on with us here---of "poetry". Perhaps
> > they
> > are right. But I don't think so.
> >
> > Judy
> >
> >
> >
> > 2008/7/15 Anny Ballardini <[log in to unmask]>:
> >
> > > As a co-manager I was consulted, and there was a mail ready to be sent
> to
> > > you to apologize to Frederick for your tone. I discard all your points
> > > Judy.
> > >
> > >
> > > I can understand you have had problems with your trip to England, and
> > that
> > > this list is a way for you to deal with your disappointment, but please
> > > understand that there are other members on this list, and that we are
> > > trying
> > > to do our best to keep it interesting for all.
> > >
> > > I would like you to apologize to Joseph for what you said. And I am
> > saying
> > > this without having consulted with my co-manager.
> > >
> > > My best,
> > > Anny
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 6:19 AM, Judy Prince <
> > [log in to unmask]
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Joe, with nothing I say intended to be an attack on you personally, I
> > am
> > > > asking for your voluntarily giving up your post as co-manager of this
> > > list.
> > > > We listmembers are not privy to back channel communications, if any,
> > that
> > > > you may have had at any point, so I can only draw conclusions based
> > upon
> > > > what you write front channel. In your posts clearly labelled
> > > "co-manager",
> > > > you have, it seems to me, been dictatorial, have not consulted
> > > listmembers
> > > > before making your decisions, and have made erratic judgements and
> > > > pronouncements. Following is a gathering of those specifics.
> > > >
> > > > You must consider the timeline of actions and decisions that you have
> > > left
> > > > us with, regarding your co-managership:
> > > >
> > > > 1) You resigned your co-managership in the wake of an upset with one
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > members whom you wished to cut from the list.
> > > >
> > > > 2) Peter Cudmore volunteered to fill your vacated position.
> > > >
> > > > 3) You said that you wanted to continue as co-manager, and, without
> > any
> > > > front channel request for input or advice from us members, you
> gathered
> > > > together a group of us to advise you on the difficult issue of
> whether
> > > and
> > > > how listmembers should be removed from the list.
> > > >
> > > > 4) Yesterday, you seemed to want a thread discontinued, and that
> > > > eventually
> > > > became evident from your saying "the thread is over." Yet we saw no
> > > > evidence that you had consulted with your co-manager about your
> > decision,
> > > > nor that you had sought the advice of your self-selected group of
> > > advisors.
> > > >
> > > > 5) Assuming the best---that, indeed, you had consulted Anny and your
> > > group
> > > > of advisors---you did not tell us that you had consulted them. You
> can
> > > > understand how autocratic that makes you appear to be.
> > > >
> > > > 6) Assuming that you did not consult Anny or your advisors, we
> > > reasonably
> > > > must wonder why you'd make such an undemocratic move, to the
> detriment
> > of
> > > > the list's stated desire for equality and fairness.
> > > >
> > > > I suggest your leaving the post, with all my due respect for your
> hard
> > > work
> > > > and your tryings. None of us regards the position as "easy", and
> few,
> > if
> > > > any of us, want to have it. But I think that your remaining in the
> > > > position
> > > > is divisive, in itself. Surely, that is not a good thing for this
> > list.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > Judy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2008/7/14 Joseph Duemer <[log in to unmask]>:
> > > >
> > > > > My understanding, Candice, is that the list is unmoderated in that
> > all
> > > > the
> > > > > mail goes through. Nobody checks it ahead of time. If you send it
> it
> > > will
> > > > > show up. (The software can be set to hold messages for approval.)
> But
> > > the
> > > > > list has both two "managers" & an advisory panel, presumably
> because
> > > > things
> > > > > occasionally need to be adjudicated. The managers and the advisory
> > > panel
> > > > > work for the best interests of the list as a whole. No messages
> were
> > > > > deleted
> > > > > this morning (US time) & I would consider such an action
> appropriate
> > in
> > > > > only
> > > > > the most extreme case. Hope this clarifies matters.
> > > > >
> > > > > Joseph Duemer
> > > > > Co-Mgr.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:21 PM, MC Ward <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Joe,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The last I knew was that Jiscmail designated poetryetc an
> > unmoderated
> > > > > list,
> > > > > > and I think our welcome message says so too. Has something
> changed
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > > meantime?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Candice
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Joseph Duemer
> > > > > Professor of Humanities
> > > > > Clarkson University
> > > > > Weblog: sharpsand.net
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Anny Ballardini
> > > http://annyballardini.blogspot.com/
> > > http://www.fieralingue.it/modules.php?name=poetshome
> > > http://www.moriapoetry.com/ebooks.html
> > > I Tell You: One must still have chaos in one to give birth to a dancing
> > > star!
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Anny Ballardini
> http://annyballardini.blogspot.com/
> http://www.fieralingue.it/modules.php?name=poetshome
> http://www.moriapoetry.com/ebooks.html
> I Tell You: One must still have chaos in one to give birth to a dancing
> star!
>
|
