David Gowen writes:
"I'm not going to claim to speak for anybody else, but I don't believe that
anyone has argued that non-librarians ought to be excluded from the list.
Anne, I don't recall seeing any postings from you before, but let me
personally welcome you to law-lib!"
* * * * *
I would like to thank David for the "kind" and "thoughtful" response. I
have addressed on member "privately" as I didn't think it appropriate for
the whole group. Proper nettiquite I believe. And no, you haven't heard
from me before because up to now I've been a "lurker".
Your right David the group should stand back and take a breath! I think all
the key boarding the group has done on this issue could be re-channeled
into other reference issues.
Perhaps the group bi-laws don't indicate specifically "non-librarians"
aren't welcome. But the mere fact it's been articulated that non-librarian
questions are ignored, pushes the wrong button. But - at least the group
is honest, and I'm sure lists and groups work this way.
I also realize that this group isn't for me.
Thanks,
Anne Jochnowitz
Reed Reference Publishing
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:48:59 PST