Propriety (was: BD: Re: SCN: "Free-Nets" in Los Angeles Times)

[patrick]

Al,

Please, first, take what I said at face value. I'm not one for
splitting hairs, nor writing extensively to explain each and every
nuance of what adjectives that I use. Please be fairly liberal in
your interpretation of what I write. "Fairly" is the operative word.

Second, I did a 'reply all' to your response, so the board was
included. Whoever included the board, well, I don't know. I thought
it was you, but it doesn't really matter. That is why the board got
my response. I didn't feel it was necessary, but whoever started the
thread, well they felt it was necessary.

Third, as I had already explained, SCN is a grassroots organizati9on.
And it is there to represent those who are not usually represented in
teh mainstream media, web sites, or other avenues of exposure. And I
feel that SCN is for those who need or want free internet access by
whatever means we can provide. So SCN does have a focus and it tends
toward internet access for all. 

That is why I continued the discussion of low-cost internet service
on teh scn at scn.org list: First to get suggestions and input on this
topic, and to make people aware of what is available.

As for the word "sucks", this from Merriam-Webster:

slang : to be objectionable or inadequate <"people who went said it
sucked" -- H. S. Thompson>. 

Patrick
--- Al Boss <alboss at scn.org> wrote:
> Patrick, I normally respect your opinions and I always appreciate
> your 
> committment and the fact that you care so much about our online 
> community. This time, though, I hope you reconsider some of what
> you had 
> to say.
> 
> > First, this topic is totally appropriate for scn at scn.org. It is a
> > topic that involves the public and would benefit the public...
> 
> 
> This sounds to my ears more like a difference of opinion than a 
> statement of fact. By your definition here, I would guess we should
> be 
> doing all our discussions on scn at scn.org, since I imagine
> everything we 
> do either involves or benefits the public. If that's the case, I
> can 
> understand why you are not using some of the interest/task-specific
> 
> sub-lists. Though the concept of the cc to the Board still
> confounds me.
> 
> 
> > Second, the mailing list page sucks. It looks awful.
> 
> 
> I guess I don't understand your definition of "sucks". The page I 
> visited certainly performed the task I needed from it. If I hadn't 
> included a URL I'd wonder if we were even looking at the same page.
> And, 
> regardless of the perfectly human typo or whatever that duplicated
> a 
> couple of list names, it looks to me as if one of my fellow
> volunteers 
> has put more than a little of their time and effort into the pages
> that 
> provide overviews of our mailing lists.
> 
> I didn't create the mailing list page, but I can imagine the
> humiliation 
> its creator must feel about having our Webmaster broadcast the
> above 
> opinion to the hundreds of people on scn at scn.org, as well as cc'd
> to our 
> SCNA Board of Directors. If it were my page, I wouldn't know how to
> take 
> this other than very personally, regardless of whether or not the 
> perceived disrespect was the intent.
> 
>  > If you run a mailing list, or are on a mailing list here at SCN,
> then
>  > please let me know who the intended audience is. And the purpose
> of
>  > the list.
> 
> Since I am able to look at the awful mailing lists page and
> immediately 
> read who the lists' intended audiences are, and what the purpose of
> each 
> of the lists is, do I suck too? Or am I just missing your
> definition of 
> "suck"? At the very least, it appears that our opinions of
> propriety 
> differ, not only on the appropriate venue for a discussion but also
> on 
> the quality and specificity of feedback offered on one's work.
> 
> 
> > There is no reason SCN should have more lists than volunteers.
> 
> 
> Maybe, but if anyone in an SCN leadership position were to take it
> upon 
> themselves to email the Board and all of scn at scn.org that one of
> _my_ 
> pages sucks, there would likely be one less volunteer for our
> number of 
> lists, too.
> 
> May I respectfully request that the points be re-stated? I find
> myself 
> unclear on what the issue is.
> 
> Also, if the list owners have read this far, could I trouble some
> of you 
> to share with us additional information about how we can best use
> our 
> lists? I have read what's on our site:
> 
> The Web interest list is for discussion among SCN's webeditors 
> volunteers and others who are interested in SCN's Web site, the
> Board 
> list is for communication to and among the board of directors, and
> the 
> SCN list is for discussion among SCN's webeditors volunteers and
> others 
> who are interested in SCN's Web site
> 
> but from that it seems to me that I'm not correctly understanding
> these 
> words, or that we're misusing our lists (is updating a page on SCN 
> really a Board issue?), or that our documentation no longer matches
> the 
> way we use our lists and is in need of updates from the list
> owners.
> 
> Not for the first time in my life, I'm confused. I'll look forward
> to 
> clarification.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Al
> 
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * *
> * * *
> .	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
> majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
> unsubscribe scn
> ==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at:
> ====
> * * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * *
> * * *


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *