[Air-l] FW: list etiquette
Dr. W. Reid Cornwell
wrc at tcfir.org
Mon Sep 11 13:06:01 PDT 2006
Where are the rules that govern discourse on this listserv?
My poor surfing skills have not revealed them.
The public page for subscription
http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org has no link to them.
The options and configuration page at:
http://listserv.aoir.org/options.cgi/air-l-aoir.org has no link to them.
Nor does the login page:
It is laughable that you chide me for violating the rules, when your act of
sending the referenced email to executive committee and Jeremy violates the
Indeed you are correct, I did send it to the public list (I had permission)
because I saw "Air" and did not read further. Again it was a defensive act
after the fact of a misread artifact. Spank me!
With regards to Terri's communications, my copies reflect posting to the
listserv. More importantly Terri's attacks were with reference to
communications that simply challenged the unsupported opinions of other
people, not hers. In fact, her posting of early last March was so vitriolic
it helped to shape my hostility and defensiveness. It also suggested that
personal attacks were the rule rather than the exception.
As what appears to be the custom, you have not addressed any of the other
points I asserted. Rather you have chosen to attack trivial discrepancies
rather that the general sentiment. Most importantly you have ignored the
differential application of ethics, rules of practice, anonymous postings,
Rasputin certainly demonstrated differential application when viewed against
the reaction to KQ-Amazon.
I have asserted that these are exclusionary practices that have the net
effect of making someone the "nigger" in your country club. (I mean no
disrespect to the black members) I use this harsh word to underscore the
intent of the practices.
I repeat these conflicts say more about AOIR and the "active" participants
in the listserv than about me.
I have been forced by my nature to examine my role in this conflict. At
least one conclusion that I have drawn is that I am reviled not because of
what I have said directly but rather that I am "irreverent" to the customs
most of you hold dear, particularly the intellectual meritocracy of
academia. Certain members will agree that this thread began long before my
involvement with AOIR.
I have recently read "The New Production of Knowledge" by Gibbons et al. One
of their assertions about the rise of Mode 2 research it is a real world
reaction to the stranglehold this meritocracy has had on the discovery of
and decimation of knowledge. The Open Source Initiative is another. Welcome
to the future
P.S. I read this book to try to understand what Jeremy meant by
"transdisciplinary". We are generating a paper on this subject as the result
of the discussion. We will publish it online in our library.
From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org
[mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Charles Ess
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:12 AM
To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
Cc: wrc at tcfir.org
Subject: Re: [Air-l] FW: list etiquette
Dr. Cornwall's response is in error in at least three ways:
> I assert that Terri Senft has been allowed, without rapprochement, to use
> vulgar epithets and she has done so on three different occasions.
1) To my knowledge, none of Terri Senft's comments have appeared on the aoir
> I assert that Charles Ess as the result of a private communication, by
> someone else, has labeled me unprofessional and unethical in the public
2) This is false. My communication was posted to the public forum only by
My communication was to the pseudonmymous Rasputin, copied to the AoIR
executive committee (a closed list) and Jeremy Hunsinger.
3) The AoIR guidelines for list etiquette state:
> You should reply privately to private
> email and not forward personal email to air-l without the author's
My email to pseudonym R was private - you have now forwarded it to air-l
without my permission.
> I don't have to prove any points I have made. They are a matter of the
> archival record.
These errors of fact and violation of etiquette guidelines are a matter of
the archival record. They serve rather to undermine than to support at
least these points - which in turn suggests that, in fact, assertions do
While intended privately to pseudonym R, I stand by my comments as now made
public by you. Unfortunately, these errors of fact and violation of
etiquette guidelines are consistent with my comments.
- charles ess
Distinguished Research Professor,
Interdisciplinary Studies <http://www.drury.edu/gp21>
900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230
Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435
Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html
Information Ethics Fellow, 2006-07, Center for Information Policy Research,
School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee
Co-chair, CATaC conferences <www.catacconference.org>
Vice-President, Association of Internet Researchers <www.aoir.org>
Professor II, Globalization and Applied Ethics Programmes
Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23
The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
More information about the Air-L