META off-topicality/Re: This list

[Guest guest]

From: " Anton "

> All that aside, I have to admit I sort of regret getting embroiled in

> the fairly unproductive recent exchanges on gay marriage, and I've

> been ignoring this religious debate of the past few days. I think

> religion is too important and core to our self-identities to be fair

> game in this context; as much as the young and idealistic

> logic/science types like and me are compelled otherwise, there

> is nothing to gain from these debates and we risk compromises to the

> supportive community atmosphere that ranks as the highest desideratum

> for the list in my view.

Mike,

I so much agree with you that " religion is too important and core to our

self-identities to be fair game in this context. " I also regret being

pulled into a debate on a topic that got so pulled out of context. The

question I have is this: would we truly drop the same sort of snide remarks

and unkind slams against one's religion and beliefs if we were relating

face to face in a social context? I think not, for the most part. At least

I don't think it would happen nearly to the extent that it does on this

list. So why do we allow it here? And it doesn't just happen in posts that

are labeled POLITICS, so it's difficult to ignore even if one is filtering

out all those designated posts.

Anyway, I'm realizing I'm one of a very few on this list who feels this

way, so I need to either decide to put up with it or leave the list.

Thanks for sharing your thots.

~ Fern

[Guest guest]

When I saw META in your heading I was very hopeful--I previously

mentioned being on a list where numerous " off topic " threads would

come up (ranging from religion to politics, even to discussion about

the discussion on the list) and it was deemed to divisive from the

primary purpose of that list.

Personally I don't care what political leanings, religious

affiliation people have, I am very interested in health, diet, and

Native Nutrition! The sub-topics that could arise, such as

government policies about agriculture,

Biblical/Koranic/Talmudic/etc. indications about diet (beyond what

they are and gee isn't that interesting), global warming, etc. all

that could go to a second list.

In one case, a parenting list I was part of, numerous questions

about diet, recipes, etc. came up, along with heated e-mails about

which diets were good, etc. Aside from sharing our *parenting*

practices about how we feed our children, it was deemed terribly off

topic--and thus a list for parents concerned about dietary issues,

recipes, etc. was born, and those most interested participated in

both lists.

Yes I can go no-mail, but even with high speed access I find the

process of wading through the off topic posts tedious--and at least

50% of the time the off topic posts vastly outnumber the on topic

posts, based upon the stated primary purpose of this list. Wouldn't

that alone plead the case for a spin off list?

I tried to search for the beyondprice group and couldn't find it,

can someone send me a link?

Leann

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

wrote:

> From: " Anton " :

>

> > @@@@@@

> > > Anyway, I'm realizing I'm one of a very few on this list who

feels

> > this

> > > way, so I need to either decide to put up with it or leave the

list.

> > >

> > > Thanks for sharing your thots.

> > >

> > > ~ Fern

> > @@@@@@@

> >

> > Fern, you're probably in the majority with your feelings, but

many

> > people may not want to get involved with those kinds of topic on

a

> > public forum. I'd guess (I'm big on guessing) that something

like 90%

> > of this list shares your traditional Christian values.

>

> Well, as someone with Christian values, that is of course

encouraging. But

> I imagine to the other 10% it's not.

>

> I guess my thing is, on a list like this, why does that difference

need to

> matter? It really shouldn't with the topic at hand. And yet when

comments

> are allowed to be dropped as they are so often, it does become a

matter of

> significance to many.

>

> I've been on lists where I had no idea what the religious or

political

> affiliation was of the people I was interacting with. And in many

ways I'd

> prefer that.

>

> > I think it's

> > just that the other 10% includes some prolific posters (and then

> > there's who just likes to argue I think :-) ).

>

> Me thinks so too. (Still like ya you're just

exasperating to try

> to " discuss " with! Of course, you may think the same of me. <g>)

>

> > While I have a

> > much more liberal take on that particular issue of gay marriage

than

> > you (and I have no idea what you guys have been discussing

lately,

> > although the subject lines make me nervous),

>

> Trust me, they made me nervous too.

>

> > I certainly hope you'll

> > stick with the list and continue to share your outlook and NT

> > experiences!

>

> Thanks, Mike. Much appreciate the encouragement.

>

> ~ Fern