On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Dan <[email protected]> wrote:
> At 8:51 AM +0000 2/23/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote:
>>
>> End this one you mean.? BEFORE we find out what the Mom and Nannies
>> want in terms of WHERE to discuss list business ?
>> Before a legitimate question is fully answered?
>
> Are you under the impression that these lists are fully public and
> controlled by some sort of democratic method? They're not.
Not since about nine and a half years ago when I was a newbie on the PCI list.
They're private
> lists owned and run by Dan Knight, hosted on Google. That's all. The list
> owner is a demigod and the buck stops with him. As has been demonstrated in
> the past, nothing we say wrt the rules matters at all. *shrug*
Uh. . . that would explain why I mentioned Dan and the Nannies way
back in this thread yes. You did read that right?
>
> WRT my previous post in this list, from your replies I see that you're not
> understanding the whole context of the issues. You really need to review
> BOTH threads, not just repeatedly say that you couldn't be bothered to look
> at the first.
I did not say I could not be bothered. I said I was not interested in
webcam issues.So I chose not to read them. I did read them now to
figure out the extent of the misunderstanding here. "Gordian Knots"
are an interest of mine. This little hub-bub is quite entangled. And
gets ever more so.
>
>
> Ok. Well. I guess that's the glove on the floor. Nannies, you gonna put a
> nail in this thread or would you care to step in and prove me wrong?
To quote some of your posts in reference to this " glove on the floor
" you have said
" If the drift is bugging you then USE YOUR DELETE KEY. "
You also said in response to John Musbach's comment;
(John Musbach)
" It is actually quite ironic that you accuse others of disrupting the
list when you too are in fact in the wrong polluting this list with a
ot post that belongs on the lemlists list.
( Dan Tearmok )
"Good point."
You also wrote;
" 5. The complaint about *this* thread is that complaints about the
list rules are only on-topic on the LEMLists list, and beyond the
one-off scope of all the other LEM lists. "
Which is what I keep asking an administrative call on. That is why I
want this thread to stay open. It has not been truly established here
that list business has no place on the list.
In the past the rule was that list business was a legitimate topic of
posts.I am waiting for the Mom or a Nanny to give the officail take on
this.
Why should any lister think that a list that has no readers is the
proper place for individual list business. When the context to threads
will be totally lost. you yourself point out this fallibility yet want
it to remain so ? You and some other listers seem to think this is
about acrimony or some sort of power struggle.
What it is about for me is keeping myself and others up to date on
proper procedure in this group environment and keeping open channels
of discussion so that people like Jonas can get the Mac help they need
without sniping and attempts to stifle their questions.
Not everyone who has reason to consult LEM has the knowledge or
technological or worldly savvy to phrase there problem in way that
will not raise someones hackles. It is up to the reader to phrase
their response in a way that does not betray their own personal mental
associations or hangups and try to present comments that are friendly.
( see the netiquette page ).And while we are on the subject of being
nice let's admit that these lists have not always been friendly to
women's Mac concerns either
The topic of list business and list rules which refer to specific
posts on a particular and specific list should be legitimate subjects
of discussion on that particular list. Otherwise to consign them to a
"deep six " file is merely a way of stifling understanding of the
rules and perhaps a way for the natural force of chaos underlying
these lists to hold sway.
To advocate disposal of list concerns to what you Dan have yourself
dubbed a "black hole" ( with a shrug) indicates a desire for vague
knowledge on the part of LEM Listers so that they are easily cowed
when the Nanny's not looking. <>NOTE<> I did NOT say you advocate
such. I said "to " advocate such.
And as to the subject of whether list business and list rules are the
legitimate post content of the list to which they are related I am
still waiting for an official answer.
--
Adrian D'Alessio aka; Fluxstringer
[email protected]
http://www.facebook.com/FluxStringer
http://www.linkedin.com /in/fluxstreamcommunications
http://flux-influx.blogspot.com/
http://fluxdreams.designbinder.com/
http://twitter.com/FluxStringer
http://mog.com/FluxMuse
--
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for
those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette
guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
