Lety, there's much truth in what you say now, but the overall thrust of
your original message was different,and at an anger level not earned -- as
your ox was certainly not being gored. True, your daily fix of happy
information was interrupted -- but you PROLONGED the interruption, perhaps
terminally. Certainly your timing, after the fact, was ill-advised. (Did
you write Gord when he asked for comment *before* the fact?)
However, I was very suprised to learn that you'd lurked for 2 years... in
which case you should have had some idea of the way Terry has treated me
and how bad most people felt about that. NOW you complain that I didn't
respond ! THEN people complained that I *did* respond!
You also seem to imply that one may not mention one's other services or
accomplishments on the list, although you omitted those who plug their
platinum workshops or Dick Sullivan mentioning his bromoil supplies or
Arnigassen mentioning his Web page (Sullivan as it happens supplies much
OTHER material, in fact the bulk of his messages are for the general
information, as Gassan, actually the author of one of the best and
earliest books in the field, does not) or quite a few others whose names
escape me at the moment.
I would say rather that many folks are here EXACTLY for that kind of
information. As you can perhaps figure out, you will only get the
non-accomplishers if that is verboten. On the other hand, I ASSURE you
I'm NOT going to be like Luis and say "read my book." I'm going to say
read issue thus and thus and give you the page number.
Above all, the question at hand is not "free speech" as Terry and for some
reason several others would like to suggest. The issue is how much
unprovoked character assassination one decent subscriber should have to
take from another. Let me remind you that I had NOT mentioned Terry or
said anything to him or about him on the list since his last "apology,"
July 3, 1997.
And something else has to be said about "free speech". This is not
the village square where your first amendment rights permit you to say
any %^&^%$ thing you think of. This is a list, owned and managed by the
Listowner, who does an incredible amount of work you take for granted as
your due. He is, as it were, the editor. He makes the decisions. He has
made one. He has leant over backwards to be fair. Now his decision is
made. This rehash and sniping only deepen the injury.
You and some others seem to have made your statements after the fact,
unless you also wrote earlier to Gord. He says he received 10 messages
against his final decision. But to now go public with that material, if
such is the case, is not fair to the list or to Gord. Did you not suppose
that would start more turmoil, endangering the list now as has not been
since day one?
Lety seems bothered now to learn there was discussion off list. Is this
evidence after all of a plot, a conspiracy? True, discussion flew back &
forth off list -- AFTER Terry resumed his slander and assault against me
-- and persisted in it, stonewalling, serving notice of what lay in store.
To suggest that this was about differences of opinion on the best
methods in alt-photo is to insult the general intelligence.
Mentioning offlist messages (which are ALWAYS in the majority) -- you're
looking for a plot between me and Luis? Oh my! Luis & I fought bitterly
last year. And, truth to tell, I tried to talk him out of this one. My
warning was, don't make a martyr out of Terry. (Whaddya know?) Yes, of
course Luis could have been "nicer" in the event. But I suspect also that
was the only way the job could be done. He was the one who stuck his neck
out, to bring about what 530 out of 540 people seemed to accept. Perhaps
when sticking the neck out we forget the raised pinky.
Now I will quote a message that came in today from a friend I'd been
describing this chaos to:
QUOTE:
I have recently unsubscribed from 2 lists, wherein the jerkyness level
went too high, for too long. It was a shame, since both are on helpful
topics, but there was just too much daily noise. Several of us warned the
offenders twice: We've left and have re-started our own "closed user
groups", with password protected `subscribe' services. It is too bad to
have to do this, but time and mental energy are far too dear...
==========================================
Unquote. As much in love with the list as I have been, and as much as even
this morning before logging on I could never have imagined such a step, I
begin to flag. There's a limit to what I can put up with (even to sell
subscriptions ;- ) Of course now I'm so tied in knots with all this
business I have no time to mail out the subscriptions in hand...I have
many ties of colleagueship and affection with many wonderful people on the
list, it really has been one of the great joys of my life, but once more
the game starts to seem not worth the candle.
I was originally going to send this only to you, Letitia, but I think, on
balance, it should go to all. ... especially since you now cast aspersions
on "offlist" communications.. In addition, I'll amplify in another,
because frankly it seemed to me yr complaint about me was that I hadn't
bled enough -- this time. I'll send an ounce or two...
Of course Gord is the innocent victim, the good guy -- but the scout
master can't make up for a bunch of willful self-indulgent shortsighted
ME-first campers... Now dare I hope that my pleas for no on-list comments
to this and my next be honored? Consider the obloquy I have absorbed in
silence, and have a heart. Read some of it and imagine it's being said
about you. We've had folks stalk off this list with one casual criticism,
who YET defend "free speech " and "a forum for everybody" at this
juncture. I'm trying to explain what DESTROYS a forum. Wasn't me. Will
it be you?
Sorry,
Judy