hi all

At 09:37 1999/09/28 EDT, sharon wrote:
>Mr. Hietman,
>I am one of the "lurkers" you mentioned. I am on this list to send
>along help & info to my best friend who has PD & cannot manage this
>by himself. I don't give my imput as I feel it would not be appropriate
>for me to do so. I don't imagine I am the only member of this list
>in the same circumstances. I am just the condiut to my friend from
>all of you, so won't give an opinion, unless Bob asked me to do it
>for him. I haven't passed on lots of the political issues or NON PD
>issues to him. He has gained lots of important info on this list &
>is grateful for it. I hope I have answered at least one question
>about some of us lurkers not participating in this list. This is the
>first time I have ever written the list on my own, without Bob's
>expressed consent to do it, but I felt a bit defensive about being
>a "lurker" Lurker Sharon, for Bob PWP

hey lurker sharon

it's nice to hear from you

i think the term 'lurker' is intended as
a humourous inclusive teasing rather than disparaging criticism

i think maybe bill and others get a tad discouraged
when trying to whip up responses from this group
and they aren't forthcoming
for whatever reason

whether a listmember 'participates' or not
[and who is to say that simply subscribing is NOT participating?]
is a moot question
or should i say irrelevant

any listmember
[and by extension anyone benefiting from a listmember's subscription]
is a part of the pd family

nobody would be a listmember
unless they were intensely interested in pd
for whatever reason, no?

[sado-masochists don't count!!!]

as to your being 'just the conduit'
to your friend and our pd-cyber-sibling bob
i can't think of a more valuable and generous thing anyone could do

lurkers unite!


with love

janet

janet paterson
52 now / 41 dx / 37 onset
613 256 8340 po box 171 almonte ontario canada K0A 1A0
a new voice: <http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Village/6263/>
<[log in to unmask]>