Re: Some further comments about the list

Dear Colleagues,

Sorry for bothering the list, but in face of the subjects put by Mr. or Mrs. 
Kessler I could not kept myself quiet.
At first Mr./Mrs. Kessler, let me congratulate you for your FASCIST point of 
view of the problems that involved us in these last few days. I could not 
imagine that in the UC San Diego could exist a person with such a fascist 
mind as yours.
I guess that removing my name from the list is not the most polite and smart 
solution for the case. Why not yours? Your fascist position is too much hard 
core than my angry complaints.
Your behavior is not compatible with a democratic way!!!!!
Probably the best solution should be sending me directely to "Alcatraz Jail 
House" at once! Why not? By this way you should get yourself free of the 
list's problems.
At second, I would like to explain to everyone of our colleagues, that I 
appeared in the list once I have been ridiculously involved by a member of 
the list, accusing me of "electronic sexual harassment", and pertaining to a 
right-wing, neo-nazi and anti-castro group (the persons' name is taken by me 
in blind once my objective is not to destroy or put someone in a ridiculous 
situation as once I had been!).
After some mails more, the person turned out his point of view and sent a 
public mail getting myself free of any culpability for the problems.
In face of all those problems, I have been the VICTIM and not the 
guilty!!!!!! So the price for that should be the exclusion? I guess not.
In a democratic way, I am sure things may be first put clear and after that 
taken the right measures.
I guess the list-owner (or owners) is a serious person, very equilibrated, 
sensitive, fair, and not so fascist in his solutions.
Thank you all and excuse me for this disencumbering!

Respectful,

JOCGomes, Ph.D.


>
>Dear Daniel,
>I appreciate your thoughful comments. I agree with you wholeheartedly that
>this list suffers considerably from lack of moderation. I have come within
>a hair's breadth of unsubscribing on a number of occasions, as was the
>case with you.
>I supported the one-post-a-day solution, but your suggestion of a
>moderator (a *strong* moderator) sounds much better. Some examples of
>where a moderator might have intervened on this particular listserver:
>1) Just for "fun," I kept track of the demography of the posts over a
>3-day period - over 75% of the WSN posts were from only 3 individuals.
>As much as we value their contributions, these folks might be reminded to
>curb the number of posts per day.
>2) The individual who sent the post in upper-case profanity yesterday
>could be removed from the list.
>3) Conversants engaged in lengthy private debates could be reminded to
>take them off the listserver.
>Problem: who would be willing to take the responsibility, and how would
>this individual be selected? Chris Chase-Dunn, as I understand it, still
>maintains the list. Perhaps he could offer some suggestions.
>Best,
>Judi Kessler
>UC San Diego
>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.