Mike, List: I am as guilty as anyone of posting multiple times in the same thread on the same day over the years, but I recognize that (a) Gary R. is the List moderator--the *only *List moderator--and thus has the *sole *right to establish participation rules that in his judgment will enhance the culture of the List; and (b) limiting myself in accordance with his request has turned out to be beneficial, forcing me to slow down and think through what I want to say before posting it. Admittedly, I am still working on reducing the *length *of my posts.
When I say "Peirce and I," it is merely shorthand for "according to Peirce, and I agree." For example, Peirce and I maintain that the entire universe is one immense sign, although I go on to identify some implications of this that he did not. Accurately summarizing and concurring with Peirce's own views as clearly expressed in his writings is not an appeal to authority, pseudo or otherwise. As I see it, this is still very much a forum for "open give-and-take," but obviously all such contributions are entirely voluntary. The only way to see more participation is for more people to participate, so withdrawing--for whatever reason--is counterproductive to that desire. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 11:21 AM Mike Bergman <[email protected]> wrote: > I have changed the title of this post. > > Since it was requested, I here go on the record as fully supporting > Edwina's points about 1) disagreeing with arbitrary one post per day > restrictions; and 2) objecting to pseudo appeals to authority when using > phrases such as "Peirce and I" blah, blah, blah. > > In case none of have noticed, we have seen a marked decline in activity on > Peirce-L accompanied by a marked decline in the number and diversity of > posters. Further, we (I) have seen frequent posters in essence drummed off > the list or banned. In my 15 years on the list there have been many > frequent posters who no longer participate due to these causes. If pressed, > I could name names, but it is probably best to keep such neutral for now. > > As I mentioned about 5 years ago, approximately the time when I ceased > myself to be active on this list, I chalk up these problems to the > leadership of the list and the allowance of some posters to dominate the > conversation. Since the forum no longer has an open give-and-take, I prefer > to devote my efforts studying Peirce, which continue to be nearly full > time, in other venues and for other purposes. Until these list problems are > fixed, I will retain that posture. Edwina, bless her heart, has continued > to labor on in the hopes of some improvement. For that I applaud her, but I > lack similar patience myself. > > Here are some data points about the decline in the number of postings on > this list over time. Note that 2011 and 2025, as partial years, have been > prorated based on adjacent year monthly trends in order to complete the > annual totals. Note, as well, that a few of the postings are administrative > in nature. They have been retained since it was too time consuming to > review each post in detail: > > Depending on the baseline, it appears that list activity has declined from > 4x to 7x over the past decade. Artificial restrictions on postings hardly > helps this trend. > > I would ask the list moderators to look over their records and post trends > in the number of subscribers -- and active ones -- over this similar > period. I suspect the number of subscribers has also declined. If not, they > have gone mostly silent, as have I. > > I have hesitated to comment on this topic because if one is to be > critical, one should be willing to step forward and work to fix it. My own > commitments prevent me from doing so and I do not have either the grace or > balance to be an effective moderator. My belief, however, is that Peirce is > needed now more than ever as we go through massive changes in thinking in > science and knowledge representation as conventional wisdom and approaches > prove wanting. Peirce-L in the best of all possible worlds would be a > dynamic, broad discussion forum that attracts new adherents and lively > speculation as to Peirce's applicability to our modern -- and rapidly > changing -- world. Sadly, today, in my view, it is not. > > Mike > On 8/7/2025 3:20 AM, Gary Richmond wrote: > > List, Edwina, Jon, Jack, > > Edwina wrote: As for the one-post-per-day- I’m against it, because I > think it transforms an interactive discussion into a site of polemical > sermons. > GR: As I wrote on List and to you, Edwina, off List, so far you are the > only List member who appears to see it this way; on and off List, > participants have tended to find this approach reasonable. This is not to > say that you are the only one who is 'against it'. But, at least for now, I > see no reason to change that rule. > > ET: . . . I really don’t applaud the use of such phrases as ‘Peirce and I’ > or 'Kant and I’… The ‘best buddies' analogy only works, I suggest, for > existential reality and since neither gentleman is around..then.... > GR: I would tend to agree except when someone posts something which is a > paraphrase of Peirce's own words, especially when that is supported by a > Peirce quotation demonstrating that the paraphrase does indeed accurately > express Peirce's idea. There is nothing 'novel' about that in scholarly > scientific discussion. > > Best, > Gary R > On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 2:33 PM Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> List >> >> As for the one-post-per-day- I’m against it, because I think it >> transforms an interactive discussion into a site of polemical sermons. >> >> And as an addition to this - I also suggest that posters should be >> careful to differentiate themselves from their ‘mentors’, so to speak. That >> is - I really don’t applaud the use of such phrases as ‘Peirce and I’ or >> 'Kant and I’… The ‘best buddies' analogy only works, I suggest, for >> existential reality and since neither gentleman is around..then.... >> >> Edwina >> > __________________________________________ > > Michael K. Bergman > 319.621.5225http://mkbergman.comhttp://www.linkedin.com/in/mkbergman > __________________________________________ > >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iu.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
