I think there are a couple of good points in Frederique's message:
1. The Baha'i idea of consultation where an idea, once put forward, is
regarded as being "on the table" and is discussed without regard to the
person who introduced it would help to reduce the personal animosity that
mars some of the contributions to this group. Let's just discuss the ideas
and not start being rude about the people who put them forward. The
corollary of this is that people must feel sufficiently detached from
their ideas that if someone disagrees your idea you do not feel a
personal obligation to defend it at all costs. It's O.K. to think:
"Hey! that's a good point" -- and let go of your idea. If people felt safer
about putting their viewpoint forward, maybe we would get some valuable
contributions from those who are at present on the listserver and receiving
the messages but not contributing. This way we would get the best from
everyone. If this is an ecofeminist discussion group, let's start behaving
in a way that is different from the aggressive self-centred patriarchal
attitude--let's start behaving in a co-operative group-oriented manner--
actions speak louder than words.
2. If people are intersted in a particular idea that is tangential to the
main thrust of the group, they are free to send a message direct to the
person who broadcast the idea (and start up a person-to-person dialogue),
without burdening the whole group with an irrelevancy.
Moojan Momen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BFrederiqueS wrote:
> HELLO Folks:
> This has been my first week, and my mail-box is overwhelmed. Considering
> the several viewpoints that have been expressed and considering that some
> have unsubscibed, perhaps you might be open to some suggestions that have
> worked well in some other networks. I might add that none of them are without
> problems.
>
> First of all, gender is not an issue here. Anyone who subscribes to the
> principles of THIS network is welcome! Let us NOT practice exclusivity,
> please.
>
> Second, there must be a way of handling all this chit-chat in a better way.
> I suggest that there should be two mailings (like Native-L does) when a topic
> gets more than two interactions, it moves on to another "CHAT" network. Other-
> wise, the network is kept for postings, announcements, and current research
> among scholars, or just simple news on what's going on in the non-academic
> world.
>
> Third, there is an acknowledgment on THIS network that flaming is easily
> achieved despite intentions not to. My suggestion is to borrow from the
> Bahai's. Whenever an idea is proposed, then it belongs to the table (the
> network). So if someone wishes to challenge my suggestion, that person does
> not need to mention my name, The suggestion doesn't belong to me anymore.
> This also helps in defusing any ego that might come with the proposals.
>
> Finally a network might consider the idea of moderation (not censurship!).
> Two networks that I subscribe to are moderated and they are very succesful.
> Of course this takes a lot of work on the part of one or two good persons.
>
> So, without any flaming or referring to my name, I hope that challenges to
> the ideas proposed might be aired and then passed on. IT WOULD BE A SHAME
> TO LOOSE MEMBERS ON THIS NETWORK BECAUSE TOO MANY PEOPLE ARE HAVING A
> PRIVATE CONVERSATION, OR ARGUING ON A SMALL POINT OF CONTENTION. Life is too
> short without leisure. PLAY ON!
>
> CHEERIO
> B Frederique S
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Moojan Momen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
