Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

[crosstalk2] Re: Drastic Measures

Expand Messages
  • Felix Just, S.J.
    I agree almost completely with Mark Goodacre s recommendations, with a few modifications suggested below: Mark Goodacre wrote: (some parts snipped for
    Message 1 of 4 , May 24, 1999
      I agree almost completely with Mark Goodacre's recommendations, with a few
      modifications suggested below:

      Mark Goodacre wrote: (some parts snipped for brevity)

      > Jeffrey's suggestion about moving everyone over to a group with a new host is
      > probably a good one, and I am grateful to him for forcing the issue -- it needed
      > to be done. One or two questions about the arrangement that I think need to be
      > thought-through:
      >
      > (1) Should we not attempt first to speak to HarperCollins? It may be that
      > they would be happy to allow a couple of nominated moderators. Or, equally,
      > they might be happy to allow egroups to host (existing) Crosstalk. If the
      > latter, we could stay linked to the existing web archive and could continue to
      > call ourselves "Crosstalk". I would be happy to write to our existing contacts
      > in HarperCollins. They have been helpful at various points over the last year
      > or so. We certainly ought to contact them at least to tell them what has
      > happened.

      Agreed; and the latter option would probably be better. Either way, making the
      existing Crosstalk moderated would allow us to keep the archives. [BTW, the fact
      that Crosstalk is *not* moderated is the main reason why I did not participated
      mcuh personally, and I suspect the same is also true for other scholars.]

      > (2) What is the relationship between Crosstalk2 and Jim West's Historical
      > Jesus group? Both are hosted by egroups and both have very similar list
      > descriptions . . . [snip]

      Neither group will be as strong as it could be if both have such similar purposes
      and are, in effect (although maybe not in original intention), competing against
      each other. It would be better to have only ONE good, moderated, scholarly list
      dealing with Historical Jesus issues, and it is far less important who started the
      group or who continues to run it.

      > (3) If we do go forward with Crosstalk2, I would personally like to see
      > moderators nominated (by the members) and voted-for. E-groups has a facility
      > to poll members so it would be easy to implement.

      Maybe the same procedures could be applied to the "Historical Jesus" group, so that
      it is no longer thought of merely as "Jim West's group" (just as I hope
      "Crosstalk2" will not be labelled "Jeffrey Gibson's group"). Couldn't "Historical
      Jesus" be the group where all scholars come together, and the discussion moderated
      by a representative advisory board? The reason for this suggestion lies mainly in
      the name. Since it most directly expresses our desired topic, the name "Historical
      Jesus" just seems so much better and more conducive for the long-term success of
      the group than a name like "Crosstalk2."

      Nonetheless, I agree that it would be good for Mark to contact HarperCollins soon.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Felix Just, S.J. -- Asst.Prof. of Theological Studies
      Loyola Marymount University -- 7900 Loyola Blvd.
      Los Angeles, CA 90045-8400 -- (310) 338-5933
      WebPage -- http://clawww.lmu.edu/faculty/fjust
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



      ------------------------------------------------------------------------

      eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/crosstalk2
      http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
    • Jeffrey B. Gibson
      ... Mark, Thanks for your message. I had already thought about the solution you offer above before I made my proposal about e-groups to the Crosstalk list but
      Message 2 of 4 , May 24, 1999
        Mark Goodacre wrote:

        > I agree that something does need to be done and I repent aspects of my message
        > of a while ago about not abandoning Crosstalk. Over the weekend (when I was
        > away from my computer) I decided to do precisely that. Jeffrey's suggestion
        > about moving everyone over to a group with a new host is probably a good one,
        > and I am grateful to him for forcing the issue -- it needed to be done. One or
        > two questions about the arrangement that I think need to be thought-through:
        >
        > (1) Should we not attempt first to speak to Harper Collins? It may be that
        > they would be happy to allow a couple of nominated moderators. Or, equally,
        > they might be happy to allow egroups to host (existing) Crosstalk. If the
        > latter, we could stay linked to the existing web archive and could continue to
        > call ourselves "Crosstalk". I would be happy to write to our existing contacts
        > in HarperCollins. They have been helpful at various points over the last year
        > or so. We certainly ought to contact them at least to tell them what has
        > happened.

        Mark,

        Thanks for your message. I had already thought about the solution you offer above
        before I made my proposal about e-groups to the Crosstalk list but decided not to
        pursue it for a couple of reasons. First, it had been proposed before to negative
        response. There was some fear expressed that to alert HC to what was going on might
        cause them to shut the list down instead of allowing it to be moderated. Second, it
        seemed to me that if Crosstalk were to survive, let alone to get back on track,
        something needed to be done quickly. But previous experience (was it yours?) with
        trying to contact someone live at HC, let alone actually to get them to do
        anything, showed that it might be weeks before we'd get a response from them. So,
        with the approval of what I took to be representative voices of the Crosstalk
        membership, I decided to do what is now a done deal and "move" the List to it's new
        incarnation. It is, of course, not an irreversible move. So far as I can tell, only
        a few who are on Crosstalk2 have unsubscribed to Crosstalk. So if we *were* abel to
        get HC to allow moderation, there would not be much of an inconvenience to
        Crosstalk2 members -- save for some of the old guard who left Crosstalk some time
        ago, but who have now subscribed to Crosstalk2, and for the absolutely new
        subscribers who were never on Crosstalk in the first place.

        But then we'd have to face (what I take to be) the fact (corrections on this matter
        are welcome) that some of the current subscribers to both Lists (Crosstalk and
        Crosstalk2) *want* to have *both* a moderated and an unmoderated Crosstalk,
        especially if moderators on Crosstalk2 are serious in enforcing the protocols that
        are posted in the welcome message and the List description..

        >
        > (2) What is the relationship between Crosstalk2 and Jim West's Historical
        > Jesus group? Both are hosted by egroups and both have very similar list
        > descriptions: "A moderated electronic forum dedicated to the discussion of
        > critical questions surrounding the Historical Jesus and the Origins of
        > Christianity" and "a moderated academic e-list dedicated to the scholarly
        > discussion and evaluation of critical questions surrounding the life,
        > influence, teaching,and theology of Jesus of Nazareth" respectively. I joined
        > Jim's group last week when I saw the decline of Crosstalk but wonder what the
        > point of having two such similar groups is? Shouldn't we just go for one or
        > the other? If I have a Jesus question, would I post it to both lists?
        >

        This is a tricky one -- and because I'm pressed for time right now, will have to
        answer later.

        >
        > (3) If we do go forward with Crosstalk2, I would personally like to see
        > moderators nominated (by the members) and voted-for. E-groups has a facility
        > to poll members so it would be easy to implement.
        >

        I would, too. But out of necessity I took the task upon my self, and then asked the
        help of Jack Kilmon, Bob Schacht, and Stever Davies. Let me state here that I have
        no vital interest in staying on as moderator -- my interest is just that the List
        be moderated.

        Moreover, the most important point is not who is moderator but what are are
        protocols for moderation. If we officially adopt the protocols I posted in the
        welcome message and List description, then there are some people from the old guard
        on the List who, if they remain the dear old curmudgeons that they are, will
        quickly be called on to the carpet.

        > But most immediately, does everyone agree at least that we ought to write to
        > HarperCollins? If so, would you be happy for me to do this?
        >

        By all means do so. But for now, we do have a List that is free of members with
        delusions of grandeur.

        Yours,

        Jeffrey
        --
        Jeffrey B. Gibson
        7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A
        Chicago, Illinois 60626
        e-mail jgibson000@...



        ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/crosstalk2
        http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
      • Jack Kilmon
        My opinion: I thought the HJ list was a good idea when watching Xtalk take its last labored gasps. I thought Jeff Gibson s idea was good for the purpose of
        Message 3 of 4 , May 24, 1999
          My opinion:

          I thought the HJ list was a good idea when watching Xtalk take
          its last labored gasps. I thought Jeff Gibson's idea was good for the
          purpose of preserving X-talk archives. I also think there should be a
          merger. Perhaps the Xtalk archives can be obtained for use on the new
          server..talk to Harper Collins about that...and Jim and Jeff should get
          their heads together to design a strategy for merger.

          Jack

          ------------------------------------------------------------------------

          eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/crosstalk2
          http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.