Vocalist.org archive


From:  RALUCOB@a...
RALUCOB@a...
Date:  Mon Nov 27, 2000  1:55 am
Subject:  Re: [vocalist-temporary] RE: ADMIN: list moderation?


ingo makes these excellent points:

<<
1) At what point do we decide that an e-mail needs to be censored?
Sarcasm can often be seen as a personal attack by others, who's going
to decide when a message crossed the line?

can't you see someone complaining 'you censored me but, you let that
through???' and they'd be justified. being offended by written words is
subjective. any 'bergering rhenquist' (to borrow from gore vidal) can get
offended if they try hard enough.

2) A certain amount of disagreement is healthy and may even lead to new
insights. This list would lose some of it's value if contributors
would stop challenging each other's assumptions (which unfortunately
will lead to the occassional disagreement).

i'm sure there must be an e-group that more resembles amy vanderbilt's
'girl talk' and there are e-groups that discuss politics which are all nasty.
the only thing we all have in common is a love for singing. beyond that,
we have widely different ideas and experiences. if we set out to squelch
the sometimes stupid insult battles on the one hand, i fear we will lose the
occasionally beautiful revelations that come from heated discussion. some
of you may remember the vigorous debate lloyd and i had on 'operatic vs. pop
singing'. i know we both received private e-mails from people from both
sides of the argument saying how much they enjoyed that debate. i know
there was a lot of passionate discussion on the subject. it was fun,
enlightening, infuriating. we both said things that we would not have said
had we not been in the position of opposing viewpoints. that discussion
would not have taken place in a censored forum. aside from the fact that i
wouldn't have been here, we would have to have considered what would make it
through rather than just writing freely as we both did. if you want to make
sure those types of wonderful debates never take place again, vote for
censorship.

3) It would create extra work for Isabelle. >>

she is also opposed to censorship. do you want to insist that our
gracious hostess act in opposition to her own principles?

mike

emusic.com