List, I'm forwarding this response to an off-list query by Jerry Chandler specifically related to this matter.
Best, Gary Richmond (writing as list moderator) Hi, Jerry, Thanks for your kind words regarding our management of the list. You wrote on the question of what is on topic for peirce-l: The purpose of this message is to address the repeating issue of What is on topic?. The challenge in addressing this issue is that CSP’s writings addresses a vast range of topics. Is it not wiser/better to be inclusive with respect to topics of mutual interest to list subscribers/contributors? I would tend to agree that it is good to be as inclusive as possible regarding the topics that are taken up on the list. You will note, for example, that even though the post in the Sadhu Sanga thread by Soren which I re-posted with a new Subject title did not make explicit reference to Peirce, knowing Soren's work quite well, and how deeply it's informed by Peirce; and in the context of his past posts on the topic (including in that thread where he *did* previously explicitly reference Peirce), I decided that given Stephen's expressed interest in the topic--mine as well (and one off-list forum member's)--that it had potential interest for some on the list. But, as Ben once wrote in a message to the list, this is not everything-l, it is peirce-l, and we--and I think it's safe to say, the entire Executive Board of The Peirce Group which owns both peirce-l and Arisbe-- concur with what Joe Ransdell wrote on what makes a post relevant to this list. WHAT IS RELEVANT TO POST AND DISCUSS HERE? ------------------------------ Since PEIRCE-L is best thought of as a public forum, which is primarily a place rather than a discussion group, people contribute or not as they think best, and come and go freely, as is taken for granted in public forums wherever they occur. There is no standing agenda except the promotion of philosophical conversation of the sort which one would expect from people with a special interest in Peirce and of other communication in support of that. Thus discussion should be Peirce-related but not necessarily on Peirce, and the working test for relevance would simply be a plausible explanation of why the topic in question should be under discussion on a list called "PEIRCE-L: The Philosophy of Charles Peirce", given that people subscribe to such lists with some more or less definite expectations about subject-matter in mind. *http://www.iupui.edu/~arisbe/PEIRCE-L/PEIRCE-L.HTM <http://www.iupui.edu/~arisbe/PEIRCE-L/PEIRCE-L.HTM>* So, while you may disagree with it, this is the position of the owners ( TPG ) and managers (Ben and I) of the list, and my position also as list moderator. But the present concern is different. As Ben wrote: It looks as if somebody made peirce-l into a receive-only subscriber to the Sadhu Sanga list. Since that list may have posts totally unrelated to anything folk might expect to find here, that sort of automatic posting is surely unacceptable, I assume you'll agree. Best, Gary [image: Gary Richmond] *Gary Richmond* *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* *Communication Studies* *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* *C 745* *718 482-5690 <718%20482-5690>* On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Jerry LR Chandler < [email protected]> wrote: > Gary: > > First of all, allow me to express my gratitude for your efforts (and > Ben’s) in maintaining the Peirce L list. > > Your time is valuable to you and I appreciate the fact that you are > contributing to CSP community of scholars. > > I understand that you, as I, desire informative posts that are on topic. > > The purpose of this message is to address the repeating issue of What is > on topic?. > > The challenge in addressing this issue is that CSP’s writings addresses a > vast range of topics. > > Is it not wiser/better to be inclusive with respect to topics of mutual > interest to list subscribers/contributors? > > Cheers > > Jerry > > > On Jan 31, 2016, at 2:22 PM, Gary Richmond <[email protected]> > wrote: > > List, > > This is from an off-list email today from Ben Udell, list co-manager, > regarding the Sadhu Sanga postings. > > > I found a bunch of Sadhu Sanga list messages at the IUPUI peirce-l > archive, none of which I ever received. Reading them, I started to remember > that I had previously found such messages in my online spam folder, in > December 2015. They hadn't mentioned peirce-l in the headers, so I assumed > that somebody had subscribed me to Sadhu Sanga and so I sent an unsubscribe > message from my email account at that time. This morning I found Soren's in > my online spam folder. The others, being older, must have already been > deleted. It is not clear that Soren actually forwarded his message to > peirce-l. It looks as if somebody made peirce-l into a receive-only > subscriber to the Sadhu Sanga list. Looking at the IUPUI peirce-l archive, > I found one such message's headers mentioning a spam diagnostic. I suspect > that the IUPUI server rejects some of the messages as spam, accepts others, > and that mine and others' email accounts are rejecting them as spam. > Anyway, at my email's online interface, I've added [email protected] > to the "Allow" list in order to make sure that anything actually from > peirce-l gets through. > > I think that the thing to do here is to ask the IUPUI technical person to > check whether peirce-l accepts messages directly from the Sadhu Sanga list > (as if it were a peirce-l subscriber) and, if so, to remove it. We don't > need peirce-l cluttered with automatic cross-postings from another list, > especially one that seems not particularly Peirce-focused, and more > oriented to Vedic philosophy and Young-Earth Creationism. > > > We are hoping to resolve this matter soon. > > Best, > > Gary R (writing as list moderator) > > [image: Gary Richmond] > > *Gary Richmond* > *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* > *Communication Studies* > *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* > *C 745* > *718 482-5690 <718%20482-5690>* > > ----------------------------- > 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 the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the > BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm > . > > > > > >
----------------------------- 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 the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
