Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 23:38:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: engcubbi-AT-ACS.EKU.EDU
Subject: Re: mouthwash, horrific




On Tue, 11 Jul 1995, Tom Blancato wrote:

> As a "thoughtactivist" who "rides the slash" of the difference between thought 
> and action (or tries to), you'll notice that my posts dip in and out of the 
> "meta", even when they are experimenting, occasionally. No, a full blown 
> literary "event" is not "appropriate" for this list, but some experimentation 
> in *conjunction* with the metalist stuff can be very good to have, vitalizing, 
> etc.

But when the experimentation is not recognized as experimentation, what 
then? Lisa Rogers found your experiment offensive and inappropriate for 
this list to the point of wanting to unsubscribe. I don't know if she 
did. In terms of metadiscussion, what point did you wish to make with 
your experiment, and what are your conclusions with regard to it?


 Even the questions you are raising in your post are not yet "at crisis" 
> vis a vis appripriateness, but are close. It depends on how you/I/we handle 
> it. For me, and something I've been suggesting, the "meta" character of this 
> lsit doesn't necessarily (have to) desubstantialize, and doesn't necessarily 
> take us away from forays, provided at least that one "rides the meta", at 
> least in certain ways. All grist for the mill, but that means, *at the same 
> time*, of course that I do respect your point about what "this list is doing". 



> Recall I that I recently posted to Malgosia on "well, maybe it's about time to 
> try a coupla experiments arising from out of our various proposals", which 
> Malgosia agreed with. He reported that it was "under discussion" by the 
> Commitee, something like that. 

As I remember, what Malgosia said was that spoons would discuss the 
proposals for new lists that had been made. It was not my impression that 
she was agreeing to experiments on this list. I could be misremembering, 
but it seemed to me that the discussion would be in regard to new lists.

There has been considerable back and forth 
> concerning the list name. I've pushed the issue a lot, preferring: list-
> proposals and phil (abbreviate it how you wish). Again: *some* experimentation 
> won't necessarily subvert: it might, on the contrary, enable the purpose of 
> the list.

I don't really agree. Perhaps I'm taking an unnecessarily narrow view of 
this particular list, but I saw its purpose as administrative rather than 
recreative. I see other lists as closer to the uses you're looking for.

>
 > But whatever.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tom

laurie

     ------------------