This List

April 17, 2002

Trying again.

This list

This list is for people to learn about the antibiotic protocol(AP), and for people who are on the AP.

her son Steve, and Ethel give us the gift of this list for education and support. They have the right to decide to moderate or ban a subscriber who is not adhering to the stated purpose of the rheumatic list. Whether we agree or disagree is immaterial. Furthermore, we do not always know what is going on back-channel. If one has a question or complaint, a private e-mail might be apropos.

IMO, we have quite a bit of latitude with OT subjects :-)

February 26, 2004

Leann,

In spite of my heavy involvement the last week or so in a very off topic

thread, I very much agree with you. I would so much welcome having

political and religious topics banned from this list. Both usually create

more heat than light, and detract immensely from the purpose of the list

IMO. Not just because of the heat, but because of the volume of off topic

mail that you have to do something with to get to the " real " posts.

So yeah, I put my vote with yours, if a vote is being taken or matters to

anyone.

I thought that someone (Heidi?) had a while back created a corresponding

political list. Did that die or is it still going?

~ Fern

Re: POLITICS - marriage symbolic of Christ and the Church? -

Suze

> Several years ago I belonged to a list that often encountered lots

> of " off topic " threads that would spin from our on topic threads.

> So we finally decided that a secondary list would meet the needs of

> the secondary threads. Then everyone who wanted to was invited to

> jump over to the secondary list to enjoy all the varied discussions,

> or not.

>

> Again not to be a spoilsport, especially as a daily digest reader

> there are lots and lots of off topic (how we can achieve radiant

> health using the work of Weston Price and Sally Fallon's _Nourishing

> Traditions_) threads, so many so that I will go for weeks at a time

> not participating on this list because it's more work to wade

> through all the e-mail, even in digest form, looking for on topic

> threads.

>

> Is anyone else having similar feelings about this, or is it just

> me? (Or have all my compatriots who feel similarly already deleted

> this message because of the title?)

>

> Leann

February 27, 2004

Glad to know I am not alone--I am not proposing a ban per se, but

another house to chat at, if I may use that kind of imagery. When I

come here/subscribe to this list, I came to chat about diet and

nutrition.

I am curious what gets in the way of folks who *like*

political/religious/etc. debate and conversation from taking it to a

secondary list with that stated purpose?

Leann

--- In , " Fern " <readnwrite@f...>

wrote:

> Leann,

>

> In spite of my heavy involvement the last week or so in a very off

topic

> thread, I very much agree with you. I would so much welcome having

> political and religious topics banned from this list. Both usually

create

> more heat than light, and detract immensely from the purpose of

the list

> IMO. Not just because of the heat, but because of the volume of

off topic

> mail that you have to do something with to get to the " real " posts.

>

> So yeah, I put my vote with yours, if a vote is being taken or

matters to

> anyone.

>

> I thought that someone (Heidi?) had a while back created a

corresponding

> political list. Did that die or is it still going?

>

> ~ Fern

>

> Re: POLITICS - marriage symbolic of Christ and the

Church? -

> Suze

>

> > Several years ago I belonged to a list that often encountered

lots

> > of " off topic " threads that would spin from our on topic threads.

> > So we finally decided that a secondary list would meet the needs

of

> > the secondary threads. Then everyone who wanted to was invited

to

> > jump over to the secondary list to enjoy all the varied

discussions,

> > or not.

> >

> > Again not to be a spoilsport, especially as a daily digest reader

> > there are lots and lots of off topic (how we can achieve radiant

> > health using the work of Weston Price and Sally Fallon's

_Nourishing

> > Traditions_) threads, so many so that I will go for weeks at a

time

> > not participating on this list because it's more work to wade

> > through all the e-mail, even in digest form, looking for on topic

> > threads.

> >

> > Is anyone else having similar feelings about this, or is it just

> > me? (Or have all my compatriots who feel similarly already

deleted

> > this message because of the title?)

> >

> > Leann

February 27, 2004

Leann wrote:

I am curious what gets in the way of folks who *like*

political/religious/etc. debate and conversation from taking it to a

secondary list with that stated purpose?

Leann,

I think it is the audience they feel they like. . .I think they like to draw

people in.

I think a second list is a good idea. . .I love this group. . .but really don't

have time for the other stuff

Sheryl

Sheryl Illustrations

http://dovedesignsrus.com

February 27, 2004

>I think a second list is a good idea. . .I love this group. . .but really don't

have time for the other stuff

>

>Sheryl

I tried a second list and NO ONE used it.

-- Heidi Jean

February 28, 2004

This list is the most amazing thing I have ever witnessed. The news of it can't

get out or we will have every crazy on the Internet joining just to experience

it.

Once nice thing is that no one swears or gets read strange>

Sheryl

Heidi Schuppenhauer <heidis@...> wrote:

>I think a second list is a good idea. . .I love this group. . .but really don't

have time for the other stuff

>

>Sheryl

I tried a second list and NO ONE used it.

-- Heidi Jean

February 28, 2004

<<I tried a second list and NO ONE used it.>>

The only way a second list works is if there are rules for this list that

don't allow certain topics and the owner/moderators enforce them.

Kathy A.

February 28, 2004

>

> >I think a second list is a good idea. . .I love this group. . .but

really don't have time for the other stuff

> >

> >Sheryl

>

> I tried a second list and NO ONE used it.

>

> -- Heidi Jean

@@ This list USED to be one of my favorites and I sent lots of people

here who were just learning about WP.

In a private back and forth with Christie yesterday (which started as

talk about dogs) I mentioned that while I support her POV and have

enjoyed her posts defending it I wish the list would get off the

politics and religion and other OT stuff.

I know that we can delete the stuff that says 'politics' or 'OT' but

frankly this trend has taken a list that had a high email volume even

higher and it is tiresome.

So I would support a second list but it will only work if the

moderators insist that all off topic posts go to that list.

I moderate the rawfeeding (for pets)list which has 2500 members and

very high volume and we are strictly on topic so that volume is

coming from on topic posts. Because the issue of keeping pets

healthy often leads to other topics like vaccines and vets etc we

have created a group of 'sister lists' for other topics. This has

been extremely successful. But we always stop off topic threads

right away and ask the posters to take them to the sister list where

they are on topic.

I don't pretend to know what is the best here but if something can be

done to change the current trend that would be wonderful. I would

love to see the list to return to it's original purpose cause as it

stands now I am barely reading it and not suggesting it to anyone

else. It has been my exp that when lists slip into off topic chaos

they eventually cease to thrive as lists.

Alison

March 4, 2004

--- In , Idol <Idol@c...>

wrote:

> Kathy-

>

> >The only way a second list works is if there are rules for this

list that

> >don't allow certain topics and the owner/moderators enforce them.

>

> Catching up here...

>

> There's another problem: doesn't provide for inter-list

> moderation. If I could move messages back and forth between lists,

it

> would be a simple thing and I'd do it. But doesn't work that

way.

>

> -

And you know what they're talking about on the nt politics list right

now – enzymes and protein?!?!?! Two lists are never going to work

with this bunch :-)

March 5, 2004

> LOL! No, it couldn't work without cross-list administration tools,

> preferably automated ones.

>

> -

Changing the description on the group home to reflect that fact that

everything under the sun (and the sun, and everything beyond the sun)

will be discussed at great length on this list might cut down on some

of the new-person complaining. The current description of " We

support one another in exploring Sally Fallon's book " Nourishing

Traditions… " probably leads many people to expect only NT topics are

discussed, when in reality the list has evolved since it's conception

and become all-inclusive. If a potential member knows coming into

the group to expect politics (with proper tag), environmental issues,

debate techniques, relationships, exercise, religion, dieting, and

every conceivable bodily function to be discussed at great length

alongside NT then it might not seem out of context to find so

many " OT " posts.

January 29, 2007

Dear All,

Last week there were a few events that transpired " off list " which

may have percipitated my being removed as a co-moderator of this

list. In an effort ot be fair an open, I wish to explain the

following.

When Amy started this list about two years ago, I volunteered to be a

co-moderator and lend whatever support I could in helping this list

prosper after the breakdown of the original list.

However, last week, without provocation by me, Tracey has decided to

remove me as co-moderator. When I asked Tracey why she felt it

necessary to remove me from the list, she said she had discussed this

with other co-moderators of the list, whom she refuses to name, and

with the list owner Amy, and that by some criteria, which she will

not tell me about, the decision was made to remove me as co-

moderator.

Why bother airing this on the list? Will this post even make it to

the list? The point is that this is unacceptable behavior. In a

private e-mail with the list owner, Amy, Amy herself told me that she

was not involved in the decision and she was not even made aware of

it. It seems now that it was an arbitrary decision and not at all

handled in a fair and judicious manner. How can anyone who try's to

step up and be a leader here, cause friction against other members

and " stir up the pot " to use their own words. You would think that a

person who takes leadership would be fair, transparent and democratic

in their approach.

In private communications with Tracey and Amy I have asked that we

know who the co-moderators of this list are and who are the co-

owners. Yet Tracey has said we do not need to know. In saying this

she is saying in fact that she does not believe that we CMLers who

share our information and participate in making this a viable list

are entitled to know who judges who can participate in this list or

who cannot and by what criteria are those decisions being made.

This is completely unacceptable. Furthermore, Tracey has e-mailed

and spoken directly to people in an effort to undermine my

willingness to help this community and has said quite negative things

about me. None of which she would even know first hand as she has

never met me. Other than a couple of e-mails this past weekend,

Tracey and I have not communicated. So how she obtains this

information about me is quite mysterious to me to say the least.

Why should any of us be part of this list where the co-owner insights

such animosity amongst its fellow leaders.

There are other lists, who are led by people who have integrity and

respect the rights of all fellow patients to access and contribute to

information and resources for fellow CMLers. The other lists have

clear rules, do not instigate hatred and provide fair and transparent

leadership. We know the criteria and the rules and the moderators.

These very good qualities that I have pointed out and they are

seriously disregarded here.

I believed in this list and the reasons it was started a couple of

years ago. I really like the majority of the people I have met

here. But I cannot condone such poor behavior. I would strongly urge

everyone of you to find your resources and help elsewhere in a more

warm and friendly environment.

In the end, I am a very busy person and I do not have time for

childish games. But you all deserve to know that the very thing

those of us tried to stop by supporting the creation of this list has

once again happened. Once again, we are not to know who co-moderates

this list, nor the criteria used to moderate this list.

Love and Peace,

Cheryl-Anne

cheryl.simoneau@...

January 29, 2007

Dear Cheryl Anne,

I feel that this post of yours is a very bad lapse of judgement on

your part. If you have " private " conversation via email, why are

you airing the conversation for the entire community to hear?

This is one of those times where you should have maybe written down

your feelings and frustations, printed it, and then burned it in the

fireplace. This support group is not the appropriate place for you

to air your issues with others.

Isn't it enough that you battle CML, work full time, and run CML

Society in Canada? Have you ever considered that maybe you have a

deep seeded need for control? Maybe there is help out there for

you, but this is not the place.

We all come to this support group site for knowledge, comfort, and

bonding with others who share our same disease. I have always

appreciated anyone who takes the time and energy to help a fellow

CML'er or caregiver in need. But, I feel that this particular post

of your really crosses over the line.

Just my thoughts, Lynn

PS: I am not a moderator, co-moderator, nor ever wish to be one.

--- In , " cher111376 " <cheryl.simoneau@...>

wrote:

>

> Dear All,

>

> Last week there were a few events that transpired " off list " which

> may have percipitated my being removed as a co-moderator of this

> list. In an effort ot be fair an open, I wish to explain the

> following.

>

> When Amy started this list about two years ago, I volunteered to

be a

> co-moderator and lend whatever support I could in helping this

list

> prosper after the breakdown of the original list.

>

> However, last week, without provocation by me, Tracey has decided

to

> remove me as co-moderator. When I asked Tracey why she felt it

> necessary to remove me from the list, she said she had discussed

this

> with other co-moderators of the list, whom she refuses to name,

and

> with the list owner Amy, and that by some criteria, which she will

> not tell me about, the decision was made to remove me as co-

> moderator.

>

> Why bother airing this on the list? Will this post even make it

to

> the list? The point is that this is unacceptable behavior. In a

> private e-mail with the list owner, Amy, Amy herself told me that

she

> was not involved in the decision and she was not even made aware

of

> it. It seems now that it was an arbitrary decision and not at all

> handled in a fair and judicious manner. How can anyone who try's

to

> step up and be a leader here, cause friction against other members

> and " stir up the pot " to use their own words. You would think

that a

> person who takes leadership would be fair, transparent and

democratic

> in their approach.

>

> In private communications with Tracey and Amy I have asked that we

> know who the co-moderators of this list are and who are the co-

> owners. Yet Tracey has said we do not need to know. In saying

this

> she is saying in fact that she does not believe that we CMLers who

> share our information and participate in making this a viable list

> are entitled to know who judges who can participate in this list

or

> who cannot and by what criteria are those decisions being made.

>

> This is completely unacceptable. Furthermore, Tracey has e-mailed

> and spoken directly to people in an effort to undermine my

> willingness to help this community and has said quite negative

things

> about me. None of which she would even know first hand as she has

> never met me. Other than a couple of e-mails this past weekend,

> Tracey and I have not communicated. So how she obtains this

> information about me is quite mysterious to me to say the least.

>

> Why should any of us be part of this list where the co-owner

insights

> such animosity amongst its fellow leaders.

>

> There are other lists, who are led by people who have integrity

and

> respect the rights of all fellow patients to access and contribute

to

> information and resources for fellow CMLers. The other lists have

> clear rules, do not instigate hatred and provide fair and

transparent

> leadership. We know the criteria and the rules and the

moderators.

> These very good qualities that I have pointed out and they are

> seriously disregarded here.

>

> I believed in this list and the reasons it was started a couple of

> years ago. I really like the majority of the people I have met

> here. But I cannot condone such poor behavior. I would strongly

urge

> everyone of you to find your resources and help elsewhere in a

more

> warm and friendly environment.

>

> In the end, I am a very busy person and I do not have time for

> childish games. But you all deserve to know that the very thing

> those of us tried to stop by supporting the creation of this list

has

> once again happened. Once again, we are not to know who co-

moderates

> this list, nor the criteria used to moderate this list.

>

> Love and Peace,

> Cheryl-Anne

> cheryl.simoneau@...

>

January 29, 2007

Cheryl-Ann,

As the president of the CML Society, I find your post unconscionable. It

appears to be an attempt to destroy the list.

Perhaps you can better spend your time by answering the questions on the

" Ask the Experts " part of the CML Society website. It has been one year

since any of them have been answered.

Zavie

Zavie (age 68)

67 Shoreham Avenue

Ottawa, Canada, dxd AUG/99

INF OCT/99 to FEB/00, CHF

No meds FEB/00 to JAN/01

Gleevec since MAR/27/01 (400 mg)

CCR SEP/01. #102 in Zero Club

PCRU 5/02 at RVH

2.8 log reduction Sep/05

3.0 log reduction Jan/06

e-mail: zmiller@...

Tel: 613-726-1117

Fax: 309-296-0807

Cell: 613-202-0204

ID: zaviem

[ ] This List