On Dec 6, 2007 6:06 PM, <joshua.zelinsky(a)yale.edu> wrote:
Quoting Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org>rg>:
On Dec 6, 2007 5:49 PM, jayjg
<jayjg99(a)gmail.com> wrote:
What CC list?
The list of people who communicated via CC: and BCC:, which was the
precursor to the cyberstalking list.
I can tell you that that list had very little to do with the later
cyberstalking
list. For example, I was on the CC for that list and was very strongly not
invited to the reformed list (apparently I argued with the general consensus
too much, and one comment was interpreted by some editors as trolling). While
those two lists had a lot of overlap, I don't see how it would help you.
Furthermore, there were at least two editors on the cc list who used email
addresses they generally keep private. So no, I don't think you'll be getting
any list, nor for that matter do I see why you should. Many of the people on
the cc never asked to be on the list nor made any comments, and I wouldn't be
surprised if the later formed list was very similar.
Why is this list important you anyways? At the risk of throwing more
fuel on the
fire, this sounds very close to some sort of attempt at guilt-by-association.
This may be the most important question of all.
Durova has shown herself to be a good and honourable editor. There is
a belief (true or not) that the block of !! was not an isolated
incident, but the result of an atmosphere that simply mislead her into
thinking things that were appropriate that weren't. While Durova
seems to have realised her error (and certainly increased my esteem
for her in the process), it remains worrisome that the circumstances
that lead to this mistake are not being discussed so we can avoid it
in the future, and that editors are actively inhibiting any honest
discussion of how to keep good editors off that path in the future.
Individual blame is not particularly interesting, but what went on to
lead up to this is. Ignore history, doomed to repeat it (and so on).
WilyD