re: Lachlan's CV (or stepping OVER the line)
Hello folks, I'm reluctant to draw this list anymore off-course than it appears to be careening, but I feel a line has been crossed that (to me) should not go unnoticed. A member of the list (Susan) asked Lachlan Brown about his academic background (which, reasonably could have been requested in a personal email, but hey, it didn't seem to be an inappropriate question--just possibly a bit off-topic). Mr. Brown chose to respond in what I take at points to be an unprofessional tone that to my U.S. sensibilities smacks of (hetero)sexist sarcasm. I am hoping there are at least a few people who find it inappropriate/unproductive to write something of a mock personal ad that states things like "I like Russian women presently" and "I am single and I am looking, but I am very picky. Any pics, 'susan'? hmmm.." If you were checking out AIR-L for the first time and came across these comments (or any of Brown's postings for that matter), would you 1) have a sense of what this list was for and 2) would you want to bother joining it? I think AIR (and AIR leadership) should have some interest in maintaining a professional, respectful atmosphere associated with the AIR list. There was a brief discussion of the dynamics of lists and whether moderated lists squelched productive, vibrant communication flows. Theoretically, in an unmoderated group, everyone can have their say. But, practically speaking, (just as in the off-line world) if there are a few loud voices that take up the speaking space, other voices are essentially silenced (or silence themselves by leaving) in the process. I think we're assuming the idealistic Habermasian "public sphere" transfers neatly to online spaces...and that's an assumption worth critiquing (see Nancy Fraser's smart critiques of the offline possibilities). Brown's unchecked involvement in this list has certainly left me (for one) feeling steadily less interested in participating in the list or recommending AIR-L to colleagues. We are all here to learn from and with each other. Brown's past list submissions have added very little to this learning and his last posting was nothing short of an affront to the list's intentions IMHO. (I should say, I am learning quite a bit from the exchanges and developments of this list--and from Brown's participation...but, honestly, I can learn about sexism, insecurities and egocentrism within academia anywhere. I'd rather be able to turn to this list for more intellectual conversation re: the internet/new media research). So, now that I've vented on that, I'd like to ask the AIR members and leadership to rethink/reconsider our stand on guidelines for posting to this list (I really appreciated Geert Lovink's comments re: the value of facilitation on this point). I'd be happy to work on the drafting of such guidelines (I've been the co-moderator of a thriving USENET newsgroup for queer and questioning youth [soc.support.youth.gay-lesbian-bi] since 1994 so, I'd be glad to share what I've learned along the way). Sincerely, Mary L. Gray ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mary L. Gray <mlgray@ucsd.edu> Department of Communication University of California, San Diego mail: PO Box 4004, Louisville, KY 40204 http://weber.ucsd.edu/~mgray ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: "Lachlan Brown" <lachlan@london.com> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:27:33 -0500 Subject: [Air-l] Lachlan's CV I like horseback riding (most weekends), impromtou skiing and winter fun, winter activities in general, log rolling, walks through the snowy woods, bracing winds, contemplating the many, many different patterns of snowflake, I like Russian women presently.
I am single and I am looking, but I am very picky. Any pics, 'susan'? hmmm... [I think this list needs a resource containing research interests and institutional locations of members and contributors, as well as a photo of each member. I mean, identity and bodies kind of matter don't you think?].
Mary Gray writes:
I'd like to ask the AIR members and leadership to rethink/reconsider our stand on guidelines for posting to this list
Mary and others, the executive committee has been discussing this a lot lately, so don't feel your concerns have gone unnoticed. I think it's fair to say that if there is a consensus amongst list members that we need to create a new standard of guidelines and means of enforcing them, we are open to doing that. My preference has been to let the list speak first. This list has been going for just under two and a half years and has grown from 14 members to over 1,000. It's reasonable to expect weird periods from time to time, and net scholars ought to figure out together how to get through them with the kind of list we want this to be intact. Nancy _________________________________________________________ Nancy Baym nbaym@ku.edu http://www.ku.edu/home/nbaym Communication Studies, University of Kansas 102 Bailey, 1440 Jayhawk Blvd., Lawrence, KS 66045, USA Association of Internet Researchers: http://aoir.org
One thing we can do as a community is to ignore indviduals who post messages which do not comply with the list guidelines. The inappropriate/offensive threads live usually as long us the inital message gets responce. I am also for new guidelines for posting. The trafic on the list is quite heavy, and deleting messages, which look like they wondered here from some other list is quite tiring. Greetings, Ewa Callahan On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, Nancy Baym wrote:
Mary Gray writes:
I'd like to ask the AIR members and leadership to rethink/reconsider our stand on guidelines for posting to this list
At 02:36 PM 3/16/2002 -0600, you wrote:
My preference has been to let the list speak first.
This list has been going for just under two and a half years and has grown from 14 members to over 1,000. It's reasonable to expect weird periods from time to time, and net scholars ought to figure out together how to get through them with the kind of list we want this to be intact.
While weird periods are only to be expected in any open or semi-open list, I'd urge the governing authority to take some action relatively soon to establish a minimum code of conduct. In my experience, open, unmoderated, academic or scholarly forums that bear on anything even marginally controversial tend to go through a fairly consistent life cycle, which eventually winds up with either an overly draconian moderation scheme in place on a second forum after the first one has been choked to death by nonessential and off-topic clutter (such as, oh, Lachlan's so-called CV) and arguments over the same, or plain old forum death. It is better to have *some* policy in place right off the bat that handles such matters as "If what you're posting is of interest to only one other person, don't send it to the list, send it directly to that person," and the like, for no other reason than it establishes the precedent and the right of posters on the list to say "That's not appropriate for the list. Don't do it again." Without that precedent, most people who feel that online forums are theirs to do with what they will will say something along the lines of "You're not the boss of me, you don't own this list, I can do whatever I want", and blithely go on their merry way. It's a variant of Gresham's Law: bad forum traffic *will* drive out good, unless there's some social mechanism in place to handle it, and if a minimal level of control is not established early in the life of the forum, a maximum level of control will be put into place later, just out of overreaction to the preceding chaos. In short, then, while waiting for the list as a whole to decide on the specifics and boundaries of a list use policy, you might want to put a bare bones one together for the time being - the longer the list goes without one at all, the harder it'll be to put the complete and definitive one into place. Rob Furr LAAPhysics UNCG http://laaphysics.org/
I want to register my strong agreement with Mary Gray's recommendation that people on the list pointedly ignore those who contribute in an offensive manner. I am on another list that was at one time visited by someone who could only generously be described as offensive, and he reformed when others were finally persuaded to quit responding to him, REGARDLESS of the merit of any individual post he contributed, while he was still sending offensive posts. I also want to register my strong agreement with Rob Furr that some guidelines be posted, that those who violate these guidelines be notified, and that those who repeatedly fail to heed such warnings be blocked from list participation. Finally, I would like to request that one of the guidelines state that sexually harassing behavior is prohibited, and that posting come ons, whether meant satirically or not, will be considered harassment. --Christian Nelson
participants (5)
-
cnelson＠comm.umass.edu -
Ewa Callahan -
Mary L. Gray -
Nancy Baym -
Rob Furr