Nasty days are here again

Katy defended us in the most recent digest: http://www.spring.com/~amy/austen51.html#katy Thanks Katy. I could not believe my eyes when I saw the remark she was responding to. Some other Amy accused us of trying to satotage the list. I invited them to check out the old board archives for a discussion about the split. (Thanks, Henry.) Will keep you posted. Oh, did you know Arnessa has sought and received permission to put up the AUSTEN-L digests? The link I am pointing you to is just a prototype. We haven't figured out the best and simplest way to do it yet.

I saw the comment and Katy's response -- nicely, and politely, put. I do enjoy some of the discussions at austen-l, but the P&P2 group is the best hands down! ;)

I adore AUSTEN-L. There's room for everybody -- Firthlisters, all of us. I don't know why people have to be so suspicous.

Amy, it is terrible how things get taken out of context. I recently joined the Austen list and had been catching up on some past posts (2/15-17 or thereabout). In those posts, a lot of people were becoming very vexed at someone's suggestion to shorten post. Subsequent posts took sides (blah, blah, blah) but two posts in particular said (I'm paraphrasing) that they enjoyed the long posts because they were information and the loss of the P&P2 group meant the posts were less lively. I was going to find you in the chat room or post it here. I'm sorry to see in future posts the conversation degenerated.

Guys -- I'm confused. I did go to the HTML site referenced above, but I found no digs against us (I don't think). What's the controversy this time?

Hello! I've been too swamped to read messages on this BB, and have been missing it very much---have just read a couple of topics this week and was happy to see some very thoughtful postings on the details of P&P---started by Hilary, I think. I am also an Austen-L subscriber, and this week or two has reminded me of the great civility and kindness we enjoy over here, which is one reason that I love visiting. This BB is a haven. The couple of times that we have had a misunderstanding, it has been nipped n the bud. Hope to catch up on the postings soon, perhaps getting filled in by Austen-in-Boston this Sunday. Jane

Guys -- I'm confused. I did go to the HTML site referenced above, but I found no digs against us (I don't think). What's the controversy this time? __ If you wait for that link to load entirely, Amy2, it should jump to Katy's very polite response and the quoted portion of a messages posted by a suspicious mind. It's a long doc. Just go get a cuppa while it works for you.

Thank goodness I found you again!!! Yesterday I logged on and everything was in total chaos. Don't even remember where I wound up. Since I can't E-Mail you I even sent note to Terry to pls tell me what was going on. No response. What did happen that Katy responded to? I couldn't imangine any controversy on this BB. Everyone is always so civil and that's one of the things I enjoy about it. Will keep checking and see what new you come up with.

I think Katy was far more gracious than I would have been.To connect our bunch to their most notorious flamer and to suppose that we are deliberately trying to undermine them seems to me to be bizarre, to say the least!

It reminds me of the petty bickerings that constantly go on in academia. And it's very sad.

One or two people get unnecessarily testy and then a bunch more jump on the bandwagon without knowing the particulars. These people love to hear themselves moralise - they put Mary B. And Mr. Collins to shame!

Like hens in a henhouse. they clutter happily on their eggs until they hear a dog bark in the distance. Then they get excited and flutter about and cackle for a while. The wiser ones (Gina w, Karen p, Dorothy g) try to sooth them and settled them down. The hens are quite safe. They can ignore the barking dog and go about business as usual is they only would. The dog probably enjoys their flutter. I do not understand how people who pride themselves on their intellectual life could allow themselves such a undignified display of self-agrandizing resentment. I hope the distant dog continues to bark occasionally. The list does get more fun to read.

Katy, I have not noticed many lurkers emerging to test whether or not their comments would be welcomed. That sounded rather an intimidating proposal in itself!

As a lurker myself, I must agree with Katy: I do not understand how people who pride themselves on their intellectual life could allow themselves such a undignified display of self-agrandizing resentment. Amy, I can't say I'll never delurk, but I admit the list is intimidating (not a bit like this!) For now I'm having fun just reading what's there. And I agree that those who don't like the long posts should not read them -- we have enough censorship in our lives already.

If all the lurkers (on austen-l) were delurk, I suspect the daily digests could approach 3000 lines! A daunting thought, indeed, even if it livened up the discussion. ;-)

We about about 5,000 hits a day in austen and 14,000 to 16,000 hits a day on the Spring overall. *Lots* of lurkers here.

what was the line about providing amusement for our neighbours and laughing at them in our turn?

5000 hits per day!!! Wow.

That's about what the log averages, 5,000 hits per day. I don't know what the total is for all three of our machines. We need to install a stats program.

Terry, Imust admit that your daily total usually includes two of me! I cannot stay away! Susan, unlike you I do not find the list intimidating.However,so many people being so adamant in their conflicting opinions does not encourage me to believe that anyone of them would pay any attention to anything I say! I feel like a schoolgirl who peeks into the staffroom and sees a bunfight going on. I usually learn a bit more than was intended! On the other hand, this place is like a friend's house. I learn a lot, in a much nicer way!

5,000!!! My god, who on earth are they?

What counts in that tally? Every time we click "Next Topic" does it count it as another visit? or is it only the first time we log in? If the former, then I must be responsible for 10-15 counts a day at least.

I think it means very little, except as a vague relative measure. If you wanted to prove the austen conference gets more traffic than, say, the music conference hit stats would show that tendency, not a lot more really. They are interesting to look at though. Terry, can we get referrer logs? Henry's looked for them but they don't seem to be here.

Amy -- I couldn't find referrer logs either, doubt if any are currently being generated... He would probably have to reconfigure the HTTP server somehow to produce them (I wouldn't really be able to help with this...)

I am a lurker and mean no harm. Just shy and love Jane Austen.

Gianine....don't be shy...we are all here for the same reason...our love for this beautiful story and other finds that are the same....we would love to hear from you....and any others out there.... I know, I have a friend who comes to lurk but it is because she is at work (doesn't have a computer at home) and doesn't have the time to contribute but enjoys the writings of those who do....

Maybe Michael Walsh gave Scottie the ol' heave ho, or at least severely warned him -- none of his poisoned pen postings the past day or two...

That would seem to be the only explanation for the lack of "hear-from-him"

I am lost here. Who is Scottie? I assume he is a trouble maker. Pray tell.

Cat, without getting into a lot of details, he takes unpopular sides for sport; is generally negative; rarely offers an idea of his own --- only picks apart others'; plus he adopted defended an unwelcome list terrorist last year presumably because she flattered him. An all-around great guy.

What do you have to do to be a list terrorist?

Now, Cat, you will hear a different opinion of Scottie. He is a man who does not take himself very seriously and, being British, loves to 'tweek' people who do take themselves seriously. He does have a knack for making sly 'mild mannered' statements that cause many austen-l folks to boil over with invective and anger. and most of us think he enjoys the termoil.

Katy -- your attitude seems (from your postings to AUSTEN-L and past e-mail to me) to be that you don't mind the bozos, boors, louts, jerks, idiots, and yahoos who deliberately try to disrupt the list, or who just don't care; no, what truly bothers you is people who try to stand up for good discussion on the list, in opposition to the aforementioned bozos, boors, louts, jerks, idiots, and yahoos. Frankly, I don't really understand this attitude, I don't think I like it, and I definitely don't have much respect for it...

Wait wait wait wait wait. Let's not let the venom infect us here, too. Chill, brothers and sisters!