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