 |
 |
Very well said, Jeffrey. These are exactly the problems that have developed on the list. If we could ALL just take a deep breath, step back, and try to look at these things (including our own posts) as objectively as we can, perhaps we could resolve it while preserving the benefits of a very useful list. It's easy to get emotions stirred up and lose sight of the objective. A list like this isn't just for the initiatives of a few but for the benefit of the many. Carole and Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:34 AM Subject: Re: Acceptable Topics for the Parkinsn List > It is worth bearing in mind that a discussion forum is not a democracy. > However, discussion fora exist within a democracy. A discussion forum is > a mailing list owned and maintained by a human being. If you have never > managed a discussion forum, you will not appreciate that they demand a > lot of time and work. And in most cases, it is a labour of love. JC is > not, to my knowledge, paid or in any way financially compensated for his > time and efforts to maintain this forum. > > Almost every discussion forum focuses on specific topic and provides a > means for people with an interest in that topic to communicate. When the > discussion gets too far away from the topic, a good forum owner will > bring discussion back again - just as a history professor will bring a > class discussion - which has veered into a different topic - back to the > topic at hand. That is because if the moderator does not keep the focus, > the list will almost inevitably fall apart. > > Thus, whether you agree or not, JC has every right to bring discussion > back to the topic at hand. Just as you have every right to leave the > forum, join a forum focusing on the issues that interest or start your > own forum and moderate it as you please. As I said, fora exist in a > democracy that allows you that freedom. > > JC has not banned all political discussion. He has just asked us to > avoid getting too far from the issue of Parkinson's. One would assume > keeping members informed of issues regarding stem cell research and how > politicians stand on the issue would be relevant. Arguing about > creationism versus evolution, pointing out that a president of a country > is an idiot or arguing over abortion legislation from a religious > perspective is, you must admit, getting very far from the issue of > Parkinson's. > > Bear in mind that a decade ago, you could not have had a forum like this > with so many people from so many places being able to communicate with > each other. Many of you likely would have had far fewer fellow > Parkinson's sufferers to share thoughts with. > > So, accept that JC has made the effort to set up and maintain this > forum, that he has not deleted your messages complaining about his > request and that this forum provides wonderful opportunities to > communicate with others sharing your condition. And if you can't do > that, find or start another forum that suits your specific needs. > > Jeffrey > > Gentry, Greyling wrote: >> "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both >> instances, there's a twilight where everything remains seemingly >> unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in >> the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the >> darkness." >> >> -- William O. Douglas, longest serving Justice (36 years) U. S. Supreme >> Court. >> >> It seems night is falling, even here on the Parkinson's list. I'm very >> sad to see partisan censorship curtailing honest, productive discussion >> about how to further pertinent -- and possibly lifesaving -- legislation >> and funding. I'd urge everyone to think carefully before jumping on the >> censorship bandwagon. A few intolerant people should never be allowed to >> dictate to the many. >> >> ~ Greyling >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of marco de michiel >> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 7:16 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: Acceptable Topics for the Parkinsn List >> >> Rick, >> >> I completely agree with you but I think we have to accept the contents >> of >> the 'charter' exist and that if one 'steps out of line', one is likely >> to be >> removed. I feel my emails regarding a database are the target of JC's >> email; >> the fact he hasn't replied to my one seeking clarification would suggest >> this is so. We can discuss the dbase outside of this group; my address >> is >> [log in to unmask] - any one else that's interested can also >> email >> me. >> >> I have no intention to just sit and wait for the end; God gave me a >> brain >> and I intend to use it. The Doctor who replied to JC's email with the >> words, >> 'that's the boy John', has waved another red rag.... >> >> Hopefully I'll hear from you. >> Marco >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >> mailto:[log in to unmask] >> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >> mailto:[log in to unmask] >> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn