[Buddha-l] Immoderaate nonmoderation

[Jim Peavler]

I have been on this list since very early on, and I cannot remember how 
many times the "moderators" have been attacked for their biases, their 
prejudices, their aggressiveness, their hautiness, their cold unfeeling 
cruelty, their lack of cooth and kindness, and on and on.

And I have seen Richard explain about twice a year that the list is NOT 
MODERATED BY ANYBODY (normally). What the subscribers get is exactly 
what the subscribers want because it is only the subscribers who 
determine what Buddha-l is like.

So, it is fair enough to urge that Buddha-l change its flavor, its 
color, its civility, its degree of academic discipline, or whatever. 
But remember, you are talking to all of us and asking all of us to 
participate in effecting the change. And the best way to effect that 
change, as Richard explains so clearly, is to submit the kinds of 
topics you would like to see discussed, and discuss them with the 
amount of academic rigor or the amount of loving kindness that you 
would like to see on Buddha-L.

Which, by the way, is exactly what Joanna did in her original posting 
on the subject. She did not blame some unfair moderator for the 
situation she described. She said the list was strongly male oriented 
and male dominated -- which it is.  And she felt she would like to have 
people pay attention to her postings more, and to respond to them. And 
her postings, while apparently not everyone's cup of tea, are highly 
valued by many of us, and, in fact, raise the kinds of subjects she 
would like to see discussed, and are written in a way that she would 
like to see more postings written. So she is doing her part to effect 
the kind of changes she would like to see.

So, play on.