Re[2]: GG:Flame Warning

[mwilliamson@alston.com]

     Yes, I also agree with the anti-flaming policy, but I'm not 
     sure I've seen anything recently that rises to the level of 
     flaming.  The recent discourse on Western v. other music 
     (i.e., the ethnocentricity thread) was perhaps a bit heated 
     but presumably a viable topic for discussion . . .


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: GG:Flame Warning
Author:  Robert Kunath <kunath@hilltop.ic.edu> at internet
Date:    2/5/97 2:24 PM


Dear Gouldians,
     
        A Gould-inspired endorsement of Mary Jo's flame policy:
     
        Many of you have argued persuasively that Gould would have adored
the Internet and the new prospects for technologically-mediated contact 
that it offers.  I'm sure you're right, but I also think he would have 
abhorred the way the 'net has in some ways contributed to a culture of 
aggressive rudeness.  I am sure he would be pleased to think that his 
listserve was distinguished by the civility of its discourse.
     
        Robert Kunath
     
On Wed, 5 Feb 1997, Mary Jo Watts wrote:
     
> All of you are aware of my policy that flaming is simply not allowed on 
> this list.  I mean it.  People are free to voice their opinions (however 
> I may disagree with them) but not in such a way that is 1) vulgar 2)
> hostile 3) totally off topic (GG). 
>
> I ask all of you to respect these ground rules and remind you that I 
> have, can, do and will unsubscribe people who refuse to comply and
> clutter up our boxes with off-topic messages full of rancor. 
>
> -Mary Jo Watts,
> mwatts@rci.rutgers.edu
> listowner, f_minor
>