Frances to responders...
The internet seems to hold great promise for serious discussion
forums, but as yet that promise is clearly not fulfilled in my
opinion. The key point of mine is that the current situation is bad
mainly for the messages and researches, and not bad for the messengers
or researchers.
The "learned experts" and their "serious interests" alluded to by me
need not imply only educated professionals as scholarly academics in
established institutions, but on this "literature" website or
listserve it should likely include intelligent literate persons with
reasonable literary goals.
The formal or official conditions of some free and open lists is an
attempt to have visitors and members comply with at least a minimum of
reasonable requirements. The establishment of such basic descriptions
is not a reason to abandon the principle of limited control.
One problem here with this list is that the fundamental terms of
reference may not be well defined. My thought here turns to the
meaning of such terms as literature and literary and literate, as well
as fiction and nonfiction and even art. If these terms are construed
as being too narrow, this restriction of "acceptable" topics may
indeed be detrimental to discussions.
In regard to thinkers "coveting" or "governing" their ideas, and thus
not posting them publicly in messages to accessible archived sites, it
is not a concern for them merely about egos or rights or owners, but
also about privacy and safety and security. Some ideas like scientific
theories and discoveries of course should not be shared by others not
experts in the given field.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
