[Sca-Cooks] dazed and confused

Phil Troy / G. Tacitus Adamantius adamantius1 at verizon.net
Mon Jul 23 22:18:30 PDT 2007

On Jul 24, 2007, at 12:41 AM, terry l. ridder wrote:

> the sca-cooks list was one such list. people who were not list
> members were able to read the list's archives using their web
> browsers. this was a nice feature in that it allowed a person
> to read the list at their leisure and not have to receive
> e-mails from the list.
> the sudden shift in list policy raises questions as to why.
> suddenly lists which have been publicly readable for years
> are now suddenly member only.

It may be simply be an attempt to control data flow, or at least  
document it to some extent. I know, for example, that posts to sca- 
cooks have gone straight up on websites and into printed  
publications. If access is limited to members at least there's a  
possibility of getting some sense of how things like this occur, when  
they do.

> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Phil Troy / G. Tacitus Adamantius wrote:
>> I note, both from the fact that you're posting here and from checking
>> the ansteorra.org site (a privilege of membership I occasionally take
>> advantage of), that you are a member of this list. Now, if you're
>> unable to read archives from other lists to which you are not
>> subscribed, as has been suggested elsewhere, there may be better
>> places to bring the question.
> i read the list via the list archives feature. i prefer the list
> archives and the various viewing options over individual e-mails.
> i have read sca-cooks far longer than i have been a member. i felt
> no need to clutter the sca-cooks list with my noise.
> i was also able to bookmark specific msgs that i wanted to have
> for reference. all those bookmarks are now useless because the
> urls have all changed. i either have to edit hundreds of bookmarks
> or abandon them. others who have booked mark sca-cook msgs will
> find that the urls no longer work.
>> It's not clear to me what the problem is. Many people on this list
>> spend a fair amount of time and effort developing and nurturing a
>> spirit of community that you won't find in many other lists.
>> Membership is too much to ask?
> many people who are not members of the list were reading it because
> it was publicly readable by anyone. the information, community spirit,
> and general sca awareness was reaching many people. now suddenly those
> people find themselves being shut out unless they become list members.

It sounds from this description that some people are confusing what  
had been a privilege, now apparently withdrawn for some reason  
assumed sensible by the person empowered to make the decision, as a  
right now being infringed upon. If I invite you to a party, and you  
don't RSVP, and you show up anyway, and I don't ask you to leave, it  
doesn't make it right to continue to behave that way. If I insist  
that you RSVP or not show up, well, it's my right as the host and  
those are the terms. You'd still have a choice.

Nobody's being shut out unless they become list members. They were  
offered an opportunity, and now, for whatever reason, they're being  
offered a different one. We don't always get everything on our own  

> the spirit of community was just flushed down the toilet when the list
> archives were suddenly switched from publicly readable by anyone to
> member only.

So the spirit of community so enjoyed by all the people who read the  
archives but don't post questions or comments, is now in jeopardy  
because somebody wants to know they exist if they;re going to read  
the list? Somehow I'm not getting the logic.

>> Now, if membership is too much to ask to read 20 or 30 lists, well,
>> we all have had to prioritize, I'm sure.
> why don't you climb down from your condescending throne and mingle the
> the 'normal' people of the world.

<sigh> Believe me, I sympathize. Up to a point. I often get far more  
e-mail than I can read and return in a given day. I get it because I  
choose to try, though. If I didn't, I could simply unsubscribe from  
many of the lists I'm on. I'm not complaining about the consequences  
of my choice, though, because it would be... and here's my point...  
unreasonable. As for my condescending throne, wherever it is I am,  
I've been here since the second day of this list's existence. Good or  
bad, I chose it, and if conditions become such that I can't read it  
anymore, so be it. Apparently one of the percs of being abnormal is  
the ability to deal with minor setbacks in what amounts to a pretty  
small part of my life. Honestly, if I had my way, nobody would be  
inconvenienced, but there's a difference between being inconvenienced  
and being wronged.


More information about the Sca-cooks mailing list