Re: [mythsoc] From the Council of Stewards
Thank you for expressing your concerns. I will attempt to address some
of your concerns, but I'd rather not drag this out too far. Anyone
with concerns can email me off-list at bluewoad@... and I'll
forward those concerns to the Stewards.
On 5/10/05, Carl F. Hostetter <Aelfwine@...> wrote:
> On May 10, 2005, at 12:58 PM, Matthew Winslow wrote:
> > a number of
> > people leaving the list, some publicly and some privately. Almost all
> > have done so because they have felt that strongly held beliefs were
> > drowning out the free exchange of ideas on the list.
> How so? Has anyone ever been prohibited from expressing, reading, or
> otherwise exchanging ideas freely here?
In the snip you are responding to, the key word is 'drowning'. The
emails that we have received from people who were disenchanted with
the direction the list was taking were almost all about how certain
topics when broached would result in a near flame war erupting with a
low signal-to-noise ratio. While we haven't reached the level of some
flame wars, many people have expressed dismay over such threads. One
comparison was to the floor of the NYSE where no one is prohibited
from speaking but where little group dialogue is accomplished. The
issue is not prohibition but moderation.
> > 1. All members will henceforth be limited to only five (5) posts per
> > 24-hour period. Any member who fails to follow this rule will be
> > placed on moderated status.
> So we encourage the free exchange of ideas by limiting the number of
> exchanges per day? If there were a thousand posts per day on topics
> that some reader(s) happen not to be interested in, how does that in
> any way prohibit them from starting and/or otherwise engaging in
> discussions that do interest them?
Carl, your opinion is respected, but is not the only opinion here.
After much consideration and discussion, the Stewards concluded that
one of the issues was that disaffected members felt disaffected
because they were being drowned by other list members who posted
repeatedly. One of the methods that is used quite frequently on some
lists is to limit the number of posts per day so that all ideas can be
aired and not lost in the noise. Further, if one's posts are limited,
then hopefully those posts will be more thought out and contemplated
before being sent, resulting in a better quality discussion all
> On the other hand, I haven't seen much "disregard for
> the views of others",
Again, the opinions of others differ and we took all opinions into
consideration when coming up with a response.
> > lest
> > we lose sight of those very principles which make the Mythopoeic
> > Society so unique in fantasy literature societies today, namely that
> > we are open to all scholars, writers, and readers of these
> > literatures.
> Again, can anyone name a scholar, writer, or reader that has in any
> way been prohibited from participating in this list?
Where did we say that anyone was prohibited? What we are responding to
is the fact that a number of people have left the list because of
behaviors exhibited on the list that the Stewards felt were not best
representative of the Society. We don't want the list to get the
reputation for being closed to new ideas and so we have implemented
As to specifics, I do know of scholars, writers, and readers who have
left the list in frustration because of too low a signal-to-noise
ratio amongst the discussions. However, I will not reveal who they are
because they emailed me personally, and not the list. If they wish to
identify themselves, they may do so.
Currently Reading: Howl's Moving Castle by Diana Wynne Jones
- Hi Bill how's the coffee? Mine's not so great lately.
Yes, I would like to see more about other authors. I do love Tolkien,
honestly the man was a genius, but I want to hear more about today too.
And I especially want to know who else reads Kazantzakis, or knows people
who do. I am behind in my reading, but he's one of my favorites, and I'd
really like some insights.
Do you know that there are rats with curly coats? I have never seen one.
Do you think they would have better insulation when they had to swim away
from the ship?
Elizabeth Apgar Triano
amor vincit omnia
> [Original Message]about
> From: Bill West <lunacy2@...>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date: 5/11/2005 2:31:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [mythsoc] From the Council of Stewards
> In the interest of full disclosure, let me say upfront that I am
> co-moderator of the
> other list with Lizzie.
> This might be rambling. I slept in late and my first cup of coffee
> hasn't quite
> taken hold as yet. Apologies in advance.
> While I am not one of the listmembers who has written Joan privately
> the list, I have expressed similiar opinions in posts here. I wasn'ttheir
> how many others might feel the same way until folks began joining the
> List. There's a lot of people on this list who never post and while I'm
> sure there's
> many who are see no problem, I'm equally sure there are others who do
> prefer not to voice it and deal with the fall out after.
> For example, those who've written Joan offlist have been labeled
> It makes them sound like sailors downbelow decks plotting mutiny.
> Why should anyone who raises a legitmate concern about the tone and
> of the list be stuck with such a label?
> It points to the reason why they took it in private to Joan.
> I think I've been on this list three or four years now, and for the
> most part,
> it's usually the same group of about a dozen folks involved in the
> I know from being on other lists that not everyone on a mail list
> but I would have thought I'd see some others out of 310 members
> over a three or four year span. A good portion of them most likely simply
> agree with the opinions the others expressed and see no reason to add
> And others..and I readily concede they may be few...might not agree but
> don't speak because they've seen how some others who've advanced an
> idea contrary to the active group are sometimes treated.
> The other list was started after the last go round over Lewis
> because it became
> exactly that..a go-round..with the tone becoming..umm..shall we
> say...acidic? Liz
> and I emailed back and forth about it and then started the Disaffected
> list as a place
> where some of the issues raised here could be continued a bit more
> civily and other
> authors outside of the Inklings could be discussed. We hope people will
> feel able to
> raise any issue for spirited debate without fear of unkind commentary.
> Now..all that being said..
> I must disagree respectfully with the proposed Rule change. I'm a
> I deal in ideas. Limiting how many posts a person can make a day (except
> cases of abuse, such as flooding or spamming) seems a form of censorship.I
> think that Joan has done a great job and I trust her to continue to do so
> without the imposing of any barriers to the flow of ideas.
> I know I have more to say but that first cup of coffee has come and
> and I think I'm going to go make another.