FInal? Thoughts on alt.book.pynchon

[Andrew Dinn]

Jester writes:

> To Joe Varo, Andrew Dinn and others who are frightened, worried, or anxious
> that alt.books.pynchon might 1) infringe on their territory, 2) cause folk
> to leave Pynchon-L, 3) invite an influx of "stupid and obnoxious" posts to
> the mailing list, 4) advance the collapse of the Western world, etc...

Frightened? Worried? Anxious? I don't think so. The idea of a
newsgroup has come up before. I think the idea is misguided for
various reasons but fear and anxiety are not at the top of the list. I
have mentioned some of the reasons and will add more but it strikes me
as rather an emotional reaction on your part that when someone
suggests that a newsgroup is a bad idea you presume this represents
fear or anxiety.

> NO NO NO!!!!  alt.books.pynchon is being created as NOT an ALTERNATIVE, but
> an EXPANSION of the Pynchon "Cyber-universe."  Presently, there are great
> Pynchon web pages, a wonderful Pynchon mailing list, and now a Pynchon
> newsgroup.  These three entities need not be INCLUSIVE, but of course are
> NOT EXCLUSIVE.

Well, I don't think it is so simple as all that. How exactly do you
expect traffic to split between the two forums? Do you not think that
there will be postings in both which you will want to see? Do you not
also think that the same old subjects will be reiterated in both
forums by those who don't read both lists? It's bad enough watching
newer list members rehash stuff which was done to death 1 2 or 3 years
ago without paying any attention to what is in the archives.
Duplicating that reduplication sounds like a waste of time to me.

> The fact is, there are probably THOUSANDS of Pynchon readers and fans who
> have NO KNOWLEDGE of the existence of Pynchon-L.  While this may suit the
> needs and desires of some Pynchon-L members, this excludes a wide variety of
> intersted individuals from the discussion.  While there are those who enjoy
> the seclusion that Pynchon-L offers, there are those who would like to
> incude others in an open discussion format - a newsgroup.  While some might
> lable me an anarchist for dissolving the moderated "order" and "system" of
> Pynchon-L, or a lunatic for inviting the "stupid and obnoxious" into the
> Pynchon family, or even a terrorist for imagined mailing list sedition --
> these titles fit nicely into the description of the spirit of an ALT
> newsgroup, so I'm not troubled.

The list is not moderated and it is far from orderly most of the time.
If not enough people know about it then rather than splitting posts
between two different forums wouldn't it be better to post regularly
to existing news groups such as rec.arts.books to advertise the list?
I actually do this every few months when someone mentions Pynchon. I
was more than happy to find the list and I am more than happy for
others to join it.

> I am perplexed.  Why do those individuals who argue AGAINST
> alt.books.pynchon simply opt NOT to take part in the newsgroup.  No one is
> FORCED to view a newsgroup.  It is simply another OPTION for those
> individuals wishing to open their minds and broaden their horizons.  Joe,
> Andrew, others... Please, no hard feelings.  This is not a flame.  I posted
> the news of the creation of the newsgroup in order to inform and to seek
> CONSTRUCTIVE advice as to the charter of the newsgroup -- not to argue the
> merits of its creation.  Voting for an ALT. group is uneccessary.  That is
> left to the main heiarchy groups.  

None of my notes were flames either. But the existence of a news group
is likely to affect the list because it will arbitrarily split
discussion into two different places. I think it would be easier and
better all round if everything was in one place. You may think
different. Ok, let's vote on the matter. But please allow me to point
out what I see as problems with your suggestion without labelling me
emotional or narrow-minded.

> I will of course review your suggestions.  There will be explicit language
> in the charter which will seek to limit SPAM and silly/obnoxious/off-topic
> posts.  But the group will not be moderated, so some crap is sure to filter
> in.  

Language sure as hell aint gonna stop spammers (particularly if it is
only in the charter - it usually has more effect in mail to the
postmaster).

> You are, of course, welcome to LURK (and join in anytime).

I might just force myself to do that. Although I would prefer it if
someone else would monitor the group and forward anything of value.
But then again that sure is going to piss off those people who read
both.


Andrew Dinn
-----------
And though Earthliness forget you,
To the stilled Earth say:  I flow.
To the rushing water speak:  I am.