In a message dated 2/1/02 10:36:36 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< But if the general will of the list is that I step down as listowner, I'll 
be fine with that. >>

I walked into a mailbox crapfest this morning (gee, another day in the 
neighborhood ;-)) and I'm slowly sifting through it. I'm posting this because 
the first few e-mails I read said that the entire active list is against the 
list owner's actions.

For the record, and perhaps I'm a lone voice here... 

I still haven't seen the relevant posts from Jeroen, but I spent a lot of 
time in the archives yesterday evening.  John's posts didn't seem to warrant 
his onlist reprimand.  He has indignantly taken it up with the list owners 
(and very rightly so, IMHO,) and they will have to sort it out.  I do think 
that this is really a problem the list has with the way Eileen reprimanded 
him and not a larger issue.  As a listowner she has it in her role of 
responsibilities to reprimand people.  How and why she or another listowner 
should do so may need to be defined.  

That said, I don't think any of the Listowners should step down.  If we have 
a problem with the way they are handling their responsibilities then we, as 
members of the list need to "lay down the law" by defining more clearly what 
we would and would not like them to do.  Perhaps adding to their ranks would 
be helpful, but what would the reasoning be behind doing so?  I also think 
they should get a vote -- they're doing the job, after all. 

As for each of them personally: 

I really don't want to see Julia leave.  As far as I've seen you've been 
unfailingly helpful and polite on the list whenever I or someone else has 
needed assistance.   It has been appreciated.  I don't think Jeroen should 
step down either. From what I've seen 99% of the assistance Jeroen provides 
has been helpful: sarcastic comments aside, he almost always responds to 
anyone who needs assistance if someone else doesn't get there first.  And I 
can live with the sarcasm -- he gives as good as he gets and so do we.  As I 
said, if we have a problem with the job he's doing we all should redefine his 
role, not give him the boot.  As far as Eileen is concerned I have no opinion 
other than those I've already mentioned, because I haven't interacted with 
her recently and don't really remember her from when I was active 3-4 years 
ago. 

BTW, in response to something Eileen said: the website and statistics portion 
volunteer work Jeroen does is invaluable and truly proves his dedication to 
the list, but IMHO doesn't warrant extra list responsibilities.  If 
necessary, list owner responsibilites can and should be changed according to 
what the list needs irrespective of whether one performs a special role or 
not.  

I do miss Dee.  When she was active in the past the list seemed "fuller" and 
more interesting.

(hasn't anybody read Kiln People? *sigh*)

Jon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to