Klarinet Archive - Posting 000169.txt from 1997/07

From: Neil Leupold <nleupold@-----.edu>
Subj: Amendment #1
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 15:57:26 -0400

On Sun, 6 Jul 1997, Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu wrote:

> Jennifer, I don't remember anyone electing you to decide which items
> of clarinet discussion do or do not belong on this list. That is
> the purview of the list moderators.

I didn't find Jennifer's posting particularly supportive to the
spirit of our Klarinet list, which has always seemed to be qualified
by openness and tolerance of others' thoughts and discussions. How-
ever, she still has the right nonetheless to express her opinion on
any given subject -- even whether or not she feels it belongs on the
list. There are no moderators on Klarinet beyond the members them-
selves, which means that Jennifer is as qualified as anybody else
to suggest delimitation of discussion material. Cap Bromley and
Jim Faye are not moderators, merely administrators. They do not
police the list for general content, except to respond to really
disruptive and/or distasteful transmissions by outsiders bent on
getting some negative attention. Beyond that, they do not par-
ticipate in the act of deciding the subject material, even when it
sometimes strays away from clarinet performance, pedagogy, and/or
scholarship, which is not too often. "That's not their bag, baby."

This much having been said, I believe that Jennifer will find --
as many others have before her -- that the only thing which *isnt'*
usually tolerated on Klarinet is intolerance itself. This is one of
the most focused and friendly discussion groups I've ever seen in
cyberspace. And when really inappropriate posts have popped up
in the past, the vocal majority of members has asserted itself
time and again, eliminating those really eggregious cases with
a spontaneously unified barrage of objections. In the case of
Dan's exchange with Jerry Korten, it is yet to be seen whether
most members find their bantering distasteful or not. I suspect
Jennifer will find herself numbered among the very few (if any
others) who find the dialogue in question objectionable. Most
of us may not be particularly interested in what they're saying,
but at least it has something to do with the clarinet. This is
much more than can be said for other threads which have arisen
in the past.

Meanwhile, amidst all of this, there is always (as I've pointed out
before) the inconquerable delete button. If your keyboard doesn't have
one of these, I recommend you have one installed. It affords each one of
us the luxury of engaging in highly prejudicial censorship, based exactly
on what we individually think and feel. This applies to the message
you're reading right now. 'Don't like what I'm saying? Delete it.
Delete every subsequent post you ever see coming from me, or Dan, or
Jennifer, or anybody else whose posts generally annoy or disturb you.
That's your choice. I would encourage that, much more readily over a
continuous string of intolerant posts about whether or not somebody
else's typewritten words suit your fancy. Usually, when no response is
forthcoming to a given submission to the list, the sender changes the
subject or simply fades away for neglect. This is the clearest indication
of all regarding how the bulk of list members feel about what is being
sent to their list.

Neil