Kata Markon

[JFAlward AT aol.com]

In a message dated 12/29/01 8:52:18 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
larry.swain AT wmich.edu writes:

<< Perhaps it wasn't directed at me either, but let me say that I subscribe
 to every list Jeffrey moderates and I have found his hand to be a light
 one.  I find your post of yesterday evening insulting and
 unprofessional.  If you have complaints the proper place to address them
 is to Jeffrey personally and to other members of the board of this list,
 not to the list in general.  In doing so, as Tony pointed out, you have
 actually perpetrated what you accuse others of doing.
 
 Regards, 
 Larry Swain
  >>

"Perpetuated"?  Is that the word you meant to use?

Do you mean "done"?  If you're saying I did the same as Tony did when I 
criticized another poster (Tony), then of course that is true.  I'm sure 
you'll agree that one is expected to raise objections in public in response 
to such publicly made criticisms, don't you?

Now, if you mean "prolonged the existence of," then your comment is ironic.  
You are doing the same thing.  Please note that there would not have been a 
second post on this matter, let alone a third and fourth from me, if 
others--including you--had not attempted to rebut my criticisms in public, 
rather than off-list.  Am I not to respond publicly to comments made publicly?

Larry, if you had truly wished to see this thread end, then why did you not 
send me your post off-list?  If you had done so,  then I would have written 
this to you, rather than to the list.  The same can be said to the moderator 
about his posts on this matter.

I think the better place for such matters is on-list; the perception that 
things might be going on behind the scenes hampers the free exchange of 
ideas.  In addition, it seems inappropriate that the validity of criticisms 
about the moderator should be judged by the moderator.  I am not so naive as 
to think that my opinion alone would be enough to cause a change in the 
moderator's attitude; it would be by the weight of the opinion of several 
others that might do so.  How would I rally others to my side--if such a 
rally were even warranted--if I made my criticisms in private?  Are not 
decisions and judgements to be made in a democratic fashion on this list?  If 
not, why not?

Now, let me take this opportunity to question the moderator's claim that he 
thought the letter from the Norwegian professor was appropriate:  If that 
were true, then why did he delay for so long any comment about the slap 
delivered to the professor by another poster?  And, even when he *did* 
finally make his first comment on this matter, nowhere was there to be found 
any hint that he thought the comments from the student from New Jersey were 
impolite.   He's never said that he does not approve of the rebuke, and he's 
had two opportunities to do so.  Shall we not assume that he thinks the 
public comments about the professor were  warranted?  If not, why not?  

One would think that if a list has only been attracting five or six posts a 
month for the last several months, that one would wish to adopt a more 
inclusive attitude toward new posters such as the Norwegian professor, and be 
quick to restrain those who would make new posters feel foolish.

This is just my perception of what has happened, and what has been happening 
in the past year with this list.  There may reasons other than elitism why 
the list has been comparatively unsuccessful; it is my hope that they will be 
found and confronted.



Joseph F. Alward, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of Physics
University of the Pacific
Stockton CA 95211