Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00754)

Rich:

There have been a few times in discussions where an attempt to move certain
topics to theos-roots was suggested. The move was voluntary. It basically
came done to certain topics getting too hot, and the people that were angered
wanted the topics moved to a list where they wouldn't have to read about them.

Earlier this year, Daniel Caldwell put up some historic postings that some
readers did not like, and basically told him to keep it off "theos-l", to
keep that stuff on "theos-roots". That time, no one came to his defense,
and the comments suggesting that he post there were left unopposed. He
subsequently started posting some messages there.

Other times when it was suggested that certain topics be moved off of
"theos-l", I've had time to respond in defense of openness. If some of us
don't like the psychical, we could say "keep that off theos-l, put it on
theos-psychic." If others don't like talk of the Masters, they could tell
people to keep it on theos-myths. And we could banish people to theos-source
when they stick to the source Theosophy. What we really have is an attempt
to tell people that we don't agree with to shut up.

We can simply use the "delete" key, and not read messages we don't like.
What is simply needed is adequate labelling in the subject line, where someone
does not have to start reading a message before deciding to delete it or not.
This could apply to any sensitive topic that could inflame the passions of
a reasonable number of readers.

For myself, I think that Daniel Caldwell should not have given in to pressure
to move some of his postings off of "theos-l", but stayed here with the rest
of us.

-- Eldon