wsn

Daniel--As it seems you have already made up your mind, this e-mail may be 
gratuitious.  But there are many of us on this list who have something in 
mind much closer to what you suggest than what we receive from the wsn.  I 
personally don't mind the occassional notices of things like causes or human 
rights violations but I am disappointed by the discussion and debate in 
general.

  Some things I would want on a world systems network list--recommendations 
of recent books and articles we should be aware of (as well as discussion of 
them).  Suggestions for new theoretical directions for world systems.  
Attempts to understand current events through a world systems framework, or 
attempts to understand ways the world systems framework should be revised in 
light of current events.  Revisitations of old world systems debates, 
particularly if this can be done in a fresh manner.  Conference and job 
notification.  Notification of resources (such as useful websites).  I've 
seen some (many) of these things done from time to time, but obviously I am 
not the only one who feels they get drowned out by stuff many of us didn't 
bargain for.

There are ways to shape a list.  One is moderation, which apparently is not 
present on this list.  Another might be only allowing people to post once a 
day, or not letting people post until at least 5 or 10 or whatever people 
have posted first.  Sometimes groups have a more moderated list and another 
where anyone can post anything.  As far as I know, PEWS does not have a 
functioning newsletter in which people put out semi-developed ideas and one 
gets announcements about the section (at least, of the three sections I 
signed up for at ASA last summer, PEWS is the only one which has not sent me 
such a newsletter).  But between the fully developed pieces in Review and the 
Journal of World Systems Research and the discourse on wsn, there is a 
yawning gap, and many of us would be thrilled if it could begin to be filled.

Steven Sherman