Thank you, Donald, for trying to bring sanity back.
The list belongs to its members.
However, we have one camp, led by Niven and including almost the entire
British former membership, which has decamped, refusing to answer questions
about its assertions on a range of topics, even though many of us,
including Laurel and me, once assumed that they had such answers.
We have Philippe, who has tried for years to get discussion going,
often indeed in a deliberately acerbic manner trying to get people
to respond, and gets himself shot at instead of his arguments.
We have other camps who wouldn't know Socratic inquiry if it bit them,
and who insist on lopping off the tallest reed.
We have a few people like Toni who continue to do good and interesting work
despite all this.
And we have me, who has asserted over years that we will have a civil
place for discussions, and that ad hominem attacks will not be tolerated.
So now we get another spate of ad hominem attacks, from half a dozen of
you at once.
Very well. Some of you, the list members, have spoken. Apparently
you want personal attacks instead of reasoned argument.
Is that what you all want? If so, I will gladly move out of the way
and let you have it.
If it isn't, say what you do want.
This is a referendum on what this list should contain, and who should
administer it. I want to see a rough consensus by 1 January 2003.
If the answer is you want the list run differently, you will have
until 28 Feb 2003 to find a replacement to administer it and a place
to put it. That shouldn't be difficult; the genealogy list is already
on Yahoo! groups, for example.
John S. Quarterman <jsq@quarterman.org>
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@quarterman.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://sinclair.quarterman.org/list.html