Modest proposal in response to anti-Lairdism
Karen Willis
kewillis@swbell.net
Fri, 02 Nov 2001 08:49:43 -0600
--Boundary_(ID_TVC2lLilStOD5G/IDMAWcQ)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
I agree with Wayne that there needs to be some sort of agreement about who
we let into this list, i.e., discussion group. All of us made choices back
in the 60's and 70's to avoid the boring, conformist, standard social
context at the time. My sincere belief then and now is that the people who
were involved with the Ranger, the folksings and the ghetto, were (like
Wayne says) more interesting, creative, intelligent, and humorous than the
whole rest of what could be found around the U. T. campus. If I had
happened to be at a party, like Fontaine says, and someone that no one else
particularly knew was ranting and raving obnoxious junk to the point that
it was poisoning the fun and causing people to want to leave, then I think
someone would have tried to restore the congenial atmosphere by persuading
that person to leave. I guess we were lucky that it never happened at a
party, but I know some of you have had freeloaders staying at your house
and being generally obnoxious who you finally had to boot out the
door. Some people take advantage of any situation, even if it's just to
get attention. That's why I think we need a monitor and list manager who
tries his best to keep the party fun and interesting by being unpaid
bouncer. I don't like hearing people beat up on Mike. He didn't delist
Don for no reason or for his own personal reason. He responded to a bad
situation and a sincere request by one of the core group. Thank you, Mike.
I don't think being discriminating is the same as being "elitist". We were
discriminating back then, and we still are. And we weren't loony,
either. Weird, in some cases, yes. But not infinitely patient with
self-absorbed nut cases who just want to grab the spot light and gab on and
on and on, not making any sense. Like at folk sing. Some of the
performers were not that polished, and maybe not even as talented as some
others, but they were given a chance to show their stuff. And if it stunk
to high heaven, we didn't let them keep on performing to the point that
people had to get out of there.
Karen
>What we seem to have here, and I am no sociologist, is a "virtual"
>community. The original basis for "belonging" was Sixty-ish affliliation
>with the Ranger Staff (my connection), the Ghetto or the music scene at that
>time. Time here being almost anywhere from 1962 to...what?...1970 or so?
><edited>
>
>OK. Let me suggest that we start over. People who are on the list now are
>have been on the list in the past, stay on the list. But there should be
>some loose "rules" for new...and continuing...membership. And by rules, I
>really mean clarification.
>
>1. Having been there...or San Francisco.
>2. Having a close affiliation with the many Austin musicians.
>3. Having been deemed "cool" by some of the above.
>4. Staying "cool"...and by this, resisting the temptation to do a basic
>"core dump" every other posting or flaming anyone who disagrees with you or
>constantly carping about this or that person or the web-meister.
>5. Bringing real information to the group...ie. posting articles and
>references which people can (if they choose) read and gain something.
>6. Acting as though this group was comprised of real sensitive,
>intelligent
>and caring people, who...although they may have a totally wierd sense of
>humor...are sort of an extended family. Let us not litter the landscape
>outside our windows with damp babies!
>7. Recognition of what others have been through. Afterall, we are
>all about
>the same age here. Think "other person's mocassins" once in a while.
>
>
>
>The above unsolicited opinion is mine alone and does not represent the
>Ghetto Web or any of its national affiliates.
>
>Wayne
--Boundary_(ID_TVC2lLilStOD5G/IDMAWcQ)
Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
<html>
<font size=3>I agree with Wayne that there needs to be some sort of
agreement about who we let into this list, i.e., discussion group.
All of us made choices back in the 60's and 70's to avoid the boring,
conformist, standard social context at the time. My sincere belief
then and now is that the people who were involved with the Ranger, the
folksings and the ghetto, were (like Wayne says) more interesting,
creative, intelligent, and humorous than the whole rest of what could be
found around the U. T. campus. If I had happened to be at a party,
like Fontaine says, and someone that no one else particularly knew was
ranting and raving obnoxious junk to the point that it was poisoning the
fun and causing people to want to leave, then I think someone would have
tried to restore the congenial atmosphere by persuading that person to
leave. I guess we were lucky that it never happened at a party, but
I know some of you have had freeloaders staying at your house and being
generally obnoxious who you finally had to boot out the door. Some
people take advantage of any situation, even if it's just to get
attention. That's why I think we need a monitor and list manager
who tries his best to keep the party fun and interesting by being unpaid
bouncer. I don't like hearing people beat up on Mike. He
didn't delist Don for no reason or for his own personal reason. He
responded to a bad situation and a sincere request by one of the core
group. Thank you, Mike.<br>
<br>
I don't think being discriminating is the same as being
"elitist". We were discriminating back then, and we still
are. And we weren't loony, either. Weird, in some cases,
yes. But not infinitely patient with self-absorbed nut cases who
just want to grab the spot light and gab on and on and on, not making any
sense. Like at folk sing. Some of the performers were not
that polished, and maybe not even as talented as some others, but they
were given a chance to show their stuff. And if it stunk to high
heaven, we didn't let them keep on performing to the point that people
had to get out of there.<br>
<br>
Karen<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>What we seem to have here, and I am no
sociologist, is a "virtual"<br>
community. The original basis for "belonging" was
Sixty-ish affliliation<br>
with the Ranger Staff (my connection), the Ghetto or the music scene at
that<br>
time. Time here being almost anywhere from 1962 to...what?...1970
or so?<br>
<edited><br>
<br>
OK. Let me suggest that we start over. People who are on the
list now are<br>
have been on the list in the past, stay on the list. But there
should be<br>
some loose "rules" for new...and continuing...membership.
And by rules, I<br>
really mean clarification.<br>
<br>
1.<x-tab> </x-tab>Having been
there...or San Francisco.<br>
2.<x-tab> </x-tab>Having a close
affiliation with the many Austin musicians.<br>
3.<x-tab> </x-tab>Having been deemed
"cool" by some of the above.<br>
4.<x-tab> </x-tab>Staying
"cool"...and by this, resisting the temptation to do a
basic<br>
"core dump" every other posting or flaming anyone who disagrees
with you or<br>
constantly carping <x-tab> </x-tab>about
this or that person or the web-meister.<br>
5.<x-tab> </x-tab>Bringing real
information to the group...ie. posting articles and<br>
references which people can (if they choose) read and gain
something.<br>
6.<x-tab> </x-tab>Acting as though
this group was comprised of real sensitive, intelligent<br>
and caring people, who...although they may have a totally wierd sense
of<br>
humor...are sort of <x-tab> </x-tab>an extended
family. Let us not litter the landscape<br>
outside our windows with damp babies!<br>
7.<x-tab> </x-tab>Recognition of what
others have been through. Afterall, we are all about<br>
the same age here. Think "other person's mocassins" once
in a while.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
The above unsolicited opinion is mine alone and does not represent
the<br>
Ghetto Web or any of its national affiliates.<br>
<br>
Wayne<br>
</font></blockquote></html>
--Boundary_(ID_TVC2lLilStOD5G/IDMAWcQ)--