Bravo, Dr. Meyer!

> ----------
> From:         Charles T. Meyer, M.D.[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:         Thursday, August 05, 1999 10:27 AM
> Subject:      Re: you are cordially invited...
>
> HI Janet and all,
>
>
> I think that the main difference between us has to do with the conception
> of
> there being a bus driver or not. And intentions of that driver.  Yes there
> is a
> bus driver but IMHO she (Barb Patterson) has elected to allow us to drive
> the
> bus ourselves except in rare cases where an executive decision has to be
> made.
> This allows for wide latitude and certainly criticism of the process.  If
> I am
> wrong I would like to hear it from her.
>
> I have written answers to your reply to my letter below.
>
> Please read:
>
>
> janet paterson wrote:
>
> > hi all
> >
> > At 19:53 1999/08/04 -0500, charlie wrote:
> > >Hi Janet,
> > >I have to disagree with you about the analogy of being
> > >invited to dinner and criticizing the list .  I see us as
> > >a family all with different personalities needs and desires.
> > >What you are saying if this is true is let us argue politics,
> > >pigs or whatever but don't comment on the process- the hidden
> > >rules which are operative..
> >
> > i'm having trouble following this - hidden rules?
> >
> > >I think we both agree that the list will  not survive as more
> > >than a place to play  and chat if opinion is censored or so strongly
> > >discouraged that people are discouraged from posting.  But it will
> > >also be in danger if we are discouraged from commenting on the list
> > >process as we see it....
> >
> > danger? what danger?
>
> I think that  leads dissatisfied people to leave the list cutting the
> diversity
> that we have- diversity is our strength.  While at times it may be
> uncomfortable it allows dissenters to get things out in the open.  You
> can't
> talk about democracy without allowing dissent.
>
> >
> >
> > >We then become a pseudomutual family like a 50's sitcom
> > >where everything is perfect on the outside but under the
> > >surface mom hates dad,  dad is screwing with his secretary,
> > >the kids are alcoholic because the family is not being real
> > >with each other....
> >
> > i can't relate this to my dinner metaphor
> > or to the list's existence
> >
>
> I think when dissent is suppressed the rules become "Everything is fine
> and if
> there is dissent then there is something wrong with the dissenter rather
> than
> the family (the list)"  At times people allow  things to eat at them- as
> I, and
> apparently many others did with Pigs- and become inactive or leave.
>
> >
> > you are talking about a true family
> > whose structure is inherent in its roots and in its origins
> > a woman and a man who have made vows to each other,
> > who have born children together, who have legal and moral and
> > emotional obligations to and expectations of each other
> >
> > the list is just a structure, a framework, a cyber megaphone, a hall
> rental
> > offered by the owner who could be anyone, granted, for virtually free
> use
> > by anyone to communicate with anyone else
> > hopefuly about pd, in this case
> >
> > imho
> > the communication among all the individuals
> > is what creates the family-like-ness
> > [and it's only a likeness, an ethereal shadow in cyber space]
> > not the list structure
> >
> > the members of this cyber family
> > have no obligations to or expectations of
> > anything except maybe a little tolerance and common courtesy
> >
>
> But that is precisely the problem.  I don't think that monopolization of
> the
> list is courteous.  I  also don't think it bad to protest- even if it gets
> a
> little rough like David did with Carole. Unfortunately instead of coming
> out as
> a suggestion earlier it came out as a tirade now.  That precisely is the
> reason
> why David "should" have stayed part of the list and he "should"  have let
> her
> know he was upset with her much earlier.
>
>
> >
> > if barb wanted to fold up the tent and go south
> > there's no 'real' family structure i.e. marriage, parenthood, etc. here
> > to hold her back, is there?
> >
> > the structure exists here because she built it herself
> > out of her own will and generosity
> >
>
> And we ought to hear from her as to her conception of the list "rules".
> If
> protest is forbidden or strongly discouraged,  it is Barb's show,  I've
> got the
> rules wrong and I'll fold up my tent and go quietly.  But I don't see it
> that
> way.  I see the need for the list to have feedback mechanisms intact.  to
> correct its course.  This is needed by all complex social systems to
> survive.
> To the boat analogy,  if  the  captain doesn't get the feedback from his
> senses
> and instruments he stands a good chance of going around in circles.
>
>
> >
> > >We in the past have clashed on this issue and never resolved it.
> > >I think that it is necessary that people not be discouraged from
> > >stating their displeasure with the list...
> >
> > we still don't agree
> > and i still can't follow your viewpoint
> >
> > i don't think your extension of the family metaphor is relevant
>
> The family analogy does hold IMO.  While you are right that there is no
> legal
> bond that holds us together there is the bond of PD-  which while allowing
> certainly a more open system than a family- it still is a social system,
>
> > if i were to extend the dinner metaphor
> > i might make it a pd support group holding its regular meeting in my
> house
> > in that case
> > you wouldn't be getting chili and beer
> > so you couldn't complain about them
> > but i might hear
> > sheesh do we have to sit in this room with that gawdawful painting?
> > and when was this place vacuumed last, anyway?
> > and why is the coffee taking so long?
> > and why in heck did you have to tell the jones' about this meeting ?
> > in which case
> > my response might be
> > gee whilikers, what did your last servant die of?
> > and
> > holy moly, don't you guys have any real business to discuss?
> > and
> > i hear there's a real purty lookin hotel with real meetin rooms
> > right down the road
> > so hit it
>
> The impolite guest analogy implies that it is your house.  If it is and I
> am
> not satisfied I will leave of my own accord. But if it is a true cyber
> democracy then it is our clubhouse not your house and it is my duty to say
> folks we ought to vacuum this place etc.
>
>
> > >If  you don't want any rules than so be it (or minimal rules
>
> > such as no commercial soliciting  and no personal attacks)...
>
> >
> > so be it?
> > them's the house rules, take 'em or leave 'em
> > [as jean chretien would say]
>
> That is twice in a row you essentially said take it or leave it.  With
> your new
> position that becomes a threat rather than a statement whether you mean it
> or
> not.  That cuts off debate if we were to let it.
>
> > >But I think the list process should be fair game...
> >
> > why?
> > don't we have more important things to discuss?
> >
>
> Like Pigs an Vito??
>
> >
> > the host/owner called / calls the shots
> > including the list creation, the list options, the list restrictions
> > the creating was not a democratic act
> > and neither is the maintenance,
> > i might add
>
> > ono here comes another metaphor
>
> > why can't we leave the driving to the bus-driver?
> > who also happens to own the bus
> > who also does not happen to be charging any fare
> > and is paying for the gas out of her own pocket
> > you lot can talk about any dang thing you want
> > just stay in your dang seats
> > and quit yer twitchin
> >
> > why can't we accept the hospitality as it is offered?
> > why don't we want to pay attention to our real problems?
>
> Like it or not these are our collective problem.  That is the way a social
> system works.
>
> >
> >
> > >If enough people are fed up with pigs then the subject will
> > >die.  But choosing not to act is as powerful as acting.  Choosing
> > >not to protest is a tacit vote to keep on the same subject until
> > >it runs out of steam (as I have chosen with pigs)...
> >
> > i'm afraid i can't follow this
>
> Lack of protest can be as powerful as protest.  It can be a signal to the
> group
> that people are satisfied.  When there was little cry about the pig issue
> it
> was a sign to the "pig-lovers  (said with no derision intended)" that
> nobody
> objected and go ahead and continue to discuss pigs.
>
> >
> >
> > >As the list co-leader your opinion is magnified significantly kind of
> > >like Napoleon in Animal Farm (a pig!!). " Some animals are more equal
> > >than others."  So your words are heard loud and clear.  I think that
> > >you set the unwritten rules with your considerable writing talents and
> > >the esteem people hold you in....
> >
> > maybe my voice is magnified by becoming a list-mom
> > but i don't think the tune has changed one whit
>
> No! When you say something it carries considerably more weight whether you
> intend it or not.
>
>
> >
> >
> > do you know that in my very first message to the list
> > in october 1995
> > there was a similar list kefuffle
> > and i expressed the exact same opinion then as now
> > i told barb not to change it
> > and bless her lil heart
> > she hasn't!
> >
> > i look on this facility as a blessing in my life
> >
> > however,
> > and not to minimize barb's efforts,
> > the bare-bones structure could be a listserv in toronto,
> > or a bbs in los angeles, or a major-domo in leeds,
> > or a bulletin board at the piggly-wiggly grocery store in the sky,
> > that part doesn't matter to me
> > other than its existence
> >
> > what does matter to me
> > is the communication between us, worldwide and instant,
> > about the toughest, scariest parts of our lives
> > which some of us can share with no-one else
> >
> > >The prime directive becomes "Don't criticize the list...
> >
> > nope
> > the prime directive has never been that
> > the prime directive is sharing and talking about pd
>
> Agreed ! I exaggerated for effect,  but then when does non-PD stuff become
> too
> much?
>
> >
> >
> > >"Now with your new position that is strengthened even more...
> >
> > maybe
> > but i've always been a ton more vocal than barb
> > and the song is still the same old song
> >
> > >we don't complain (as a family member should but a guest shouldn't).
> Are
> > >the complainers guests or are they family members?  If they are part of
> > >the family then they have a right and perhaps even a duty to complain
> if
> > >they are guests they should be polite and suffer in silence and leave-
> > >smiling but dissatisfied...
> >
> > this is not a 'real' family
> > it's a cyberial ethereal replication of a shadow of a family
> > similar to the way that a three dimensional [as opposed to ethereal]
> > support group can become 'family-like'
> >
>
> No it is not a real family.  But the statement that" it is a blessing on
> my
> life" says it means much to you see it as a powerful system that you have
> a
> more than a casual investment in (as do I and a large proportion of the
> regulars on the list)
>
>
> >
> > this lecture has been presented free of charge
> > with assistance from one pansy-bell
> >
> > janet
> >
> > janet paterson
> > 52 now / 41 dx / 37 onset
> > snail-mail: PO Box 171  Almonte  Ontario  K0A 1A0  Canada
> > website: a new voice <http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Village/6263/>
> > e-mail: <[log in to unmask]>
>
> --
> **************************************************************************
> ****************
>
> Charles T. Meyer,  M.D.
> Middleton (Madison), Wisconsin
> [log in to unmask]
> **************************************************************************
> ****************
>