digression sessions
Matt Kozusko (mkozusko@parallel.park.uga.edu)
Sat, 29 Aug 1998 14:23:08 -0400
J J R wrote:
>
> I was on another listserve some time ago that had a similar problem--we
> digressed easily and often. But I realized the digressions were a
> natural part of talking about this guy's work. He wrote about
> everything from spirituality to dogma to philosophy (both formal and a
> commentary on the philosophy behind our everyday lives) to human
> nature--the purpose of his writing was, in part, to spark dialog in these
> areas. By talking about his writing, we entered into a broader dialog of
> which his writing was a part. So, even though the digressions weren't
> technically part of the purpose of the list, they certainly were the
> purpose of this man's writing.
It's ultimately very silly to insist that a discussion list discuss only
the topics that are laid out in a group's name and charter. The reason
I thought I could get away with my recent post is that its contents were
preposterous.
In any case, there doesn't seem to be much of a problem on this list
with the issue. People who are genuinely upset by digressions end up
either leaving or adjusting. The core of active members here is really
what dictates the sort of behavior that is appropriate, and those
members tend to be the sort of posters who are no longer interested in
the "what's your favorite story" or "is Salinger really Pynchon"
discussions. The truth be told, such topics--the very topics
disgruntled newcomers generally want to engage in--are one-time, static
personal indulgences more than they are dynamic discussions.
--
Matt Kozusko mkozusko@parallel.park.uga.edu