>"J. van Baardwijk" wrote: > > > > This is a gross exaggeration. A handful of people (five? six?) are now > > complaining, while this list has over 300 subscribers. > Ken replied: >But if that handful is the vast majority of those who have >voiced any opinion at all? Is it safe to assume the non-posters >are on the other side? I don't think so. They probably just >don't care. In which case the voices of the ones who *do* >should probably count for a lot.
For some of us, it's not a matter of not caring; I simply have not been able to follow the list closely for the past couple of weeks. I spent from Jan. 23 through Jan. 28 at a conference, put in one good solid day of trying to catch up at work, then got hit by one of the worst ice storm to hit the Kansas City area in several decades. I just got my electricity back a few hours ago, and decided to catch up with brin-l and some other related emails. I know that I speak for many other lurkers and semi-lurkers who I know from other lists/chatrooms/email relationships. We feel that Eileen's original warning was handled very poorly, and we are offended by what many of us perceive as Jeroen's smugness since that warning was issued. We do care, we simply have other priorities that keeps us from becoming vocal, regular participants in this list. I have encouraged other lurkers and semi-lurkers to post their opinions also, but many are afraid of being flamed or just like their anonymity, so I'm not sure how effective my arguments to them will be. Let me also go on the record here and state that none of the other folks I know are anti-Jeroen or anti-Eileen, we simply think this situation has been handled poorly. Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
