Sender: Rare Books and Special Collections Forum <EXLIBRIS@RUTVM1.BITNET>
On Saturday as i write I am glad I was away for two days and didn't have the
opportunity to weigh in to the fray in its most active moments.
Let me try this: No one who contributed to the discussion over the past two
days is without the ability to contribute information and discussion of great
value to the rest of us. There were (I submit) some lapses of politesse and
taste, and they were not limited to any one of the several sides I observed
(the original questioner about map repair may be the only one scot-free on
that score, and I include myself!).
I agree with those who take the broader view of what the list is for and who
may read and comment in it. I particularly like Lorraine Olley's comment that
we are still all learning how to use the technology. It may indeed by
(read: be) appropriate to have topical lists stratified by audiences: indeed,
they exist and are easy to create. The current state of the net is such that
if it is desirable to create them, then someone can do so easily.
I think we all also learned, from more than one contributor, that it is easy
to be perceived in ways that one didn't mean when one sent the message.
Seasonal note: I feel a little like the moderator in the vice-presidential
debate. Final somewhat Beckettian note: let's go on. We can't go on. Let's
go on.
--Peter Graham
Rutgers University