[Buddha-l] Immoderaate nonmoderation

[Chan Fu]

On 10/12/05, Jim Peavler <jpeavler at mindspring.com> wrote:
> 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.

Speaking of buddhism...
oops, well...
Was there something between the
begiining of that message and the end of it?

The buffet here provides a lot of such
air sandwiches, for which I am not
ungrateful, mind you.

But, nutritionally speaking, it's a rather
sparse diet. A few calories from
Richard's irony or Joy's disenchantment
are hardly enough to support this poor
snake in the grass.

In fact, Jo's posts have been the ones that
most inspired introspection and inspection.
I'd quote Blyth, but I sent that book to
someone who wanted it and I don't trust
memory. Thus neither do I trust the memories
of 2500-yr-old monks.

So, as Jim says, "Play on."

"A breeze blew the scent of cherry blossom.
Just once, thought Lu-Tse, it would be nice
to pick cherries."
--Terry Pratchett, "Thief of Time"