What kind of list do you want? was Odds and ends

[nicholas dean]

>Karen said:-


>Lovely rose glasses you have on there. Still, when someone makes an
>entire post, degrading me, I tend to respond.


You misunderstood, Karen. When I am addressing someone, I do so 
directly, using their name; rather as I am doing now, in fact.

I read posts in batches, not individually, and the 'Cuts and Bruises' 
thread unfolded to me in one digest. My 'Netiquette' post was 
addressed to the whole list, and was aimed at
- People who had made personal attacks on those whose posts they disagreed with
- People who were excessively defensive
- New arrivals who felt it appropriate to start dictating to 
established participants.

I rather admired you for taking responsibility for everyone's 
indiscretions...everyone else went very quiet!

Joj joins in:-
>
>
>I would like to offer a real welcome to Karen and say that I enjoy her
>comments, and agree with many.  No one is expected to read through a few
>years of posts before they can join in.


Perhaps my comment was too subtle. What I meant was that if Karen had 
read through some of *my* posts through the last months and years, 
she would have understood how inappropriate her attack on me was. 
Sticks and stones; in the end, name-calling says more about the 
caller than the callee.


>  I don't think Karen made any
>inappropriate comments.  I can't say the same for someone else.

Oh come, come; have the courage of your convictions. If you wish to 
criticise someone, either name and shame them or contact them 
off-list and tell them what your problem is. So many people have 
offended over the last few days that no one knows who you mean (and 
do any of us care?)

Karen again:-

>   I will now try to avoid
>stepping on your toes, if you would do the same back, we'll get along
>just fine.

I have no quarrel with you, Karen.

I do increasingly feel, however, that this list is not what it used 
to be. There has always been a certain amount of 'chatty', 
lightweight discussion, and even the occasional spat. The recent 
fracas, however, was something else, and it shocked me deeply; not so 
much the subject-matter, but the real nastiness of some of the 
comments, the complete lack of logic in the arguments, and the speed 
at which it deteriorated into personal attacks. Not very Grown Up at 
all.

I have been part of the list since just after PS/SS was released, and 
since then have done my best, with limited time available, to 
contribute substantive, on-topic posts, to respond to questions to 
which I knew the answer, and even occasionally to put together essays 
on subjects which I thought might be of interest and might provoke 
discussion.

It seems, however, that there is a vocal faction of the list-members 
whose primary interest is chat, not technical discussion of the 
movies. Is this faction in the majority? If so, this is not the list 
for me. I am sure that some of you are about to hit the reply button 
with something like 'Go and find another list then' or another 
comment of similar emotional maturity; and that's fine. Sticks and 
stones again. I don't even have to find another list; as I believe I 
have already mentioned, I do participate in another, private list 
dedicated to discussion of HP, along with other writers and movies. 
Those list members are not as prolific as this board, but they are 
sensible, humorous and responsive, and I cannot imagine any 
circumstances whatsoever in which the discussion there would fall to 
the depths achieved here last week.

I have been discussing this off-list with several people who have 
been in touch to support my recent posts. One person has raised the 
point which, in fact, has been bothering me too; this list will never 
be an in-depth, serious discussion unless the participants make it 
so, and with Richard's recent departure, there are now very few here, 
other than myself, who seem to want this level of discourse.

So here is the question; what kind of list do you want? Do you want 
to chat about the number of hairs on Dan Radcliffe's chest, or do you 
want to talk about movie techniques, camerawork, directors' 
interpretations and that sort of thing? I'm not suggesting for an 
instant that this should be a dry, humourless discussion with no 
interjections and ad-libs; but surely I am not the only one for whom 
talk about the personal attractions of the actors holds no interest 
whatsoever?

I notice that some people have been bravely carrying on with other 
threads despite the subterranean rumblings of this one. Very good; 
but we have talked about the significance of Harry's/Lily's 
eye-colour several times before; and we had a discussion about JKR's 
comment about the foreshadowing in PoA back in 2004, after PoA was 
released. So perhaps reading old threads does have a certain 
importance, Joj.

And perhaps this is an indication that it is indeed time for me to 
focus my efforts elsewhere; because if old threads are going to be 
rehashed with no reference to what has gone before, then maybe it's 
time to leave the list in the hands of the newbies; since we oldies 
have a choice of either saying again what we have said before (not an 
attractive option when one has limited time), ignoring the 
discussion, or getting grumpy and saying 'why don't you read what has 
already been said on this subject?' None of these options is fun, 
none of them is intellectually stimulating, and if neither of those 
criteria is met, why be part of the list any more?

I lack Richard's dramatic ability, and so cannot flounce off 
histrionically; my inclination was to put the list on probation for a 
month, and if the calibre of posts did not improve, quietly to 
disappear. However, those off-list posts have convinced me to appeal 
to the list one final time, to find out whether there is any interest 
at all in more substantial discussion. If not, I'll happily leave, 
and without a backward glance. I have felt for a while now that I am 
putting more into the list than I am getting out of it. Lists evolve, 
and perhaps the natural evolution of this one is towards the 
lightweight. That's fine; but it's not where I want to be.

Cheers,
Nicholas