[Milton-L] NO posts per day (in certain circumstances)

jonnyangel junkopardner at att.net
Tue Dec 21 03:43:26 EST 2010


Well Jeffery, my college has had to discontinue access to the OED  
Online to free up money to buy uniforms for the basketball team. So,  
when you use big words like "paramour," I'm (literally) at a loss for  
words. :-)

Long live Milton.
Long live poetry.

-jonny


On Dec 20, 2010, at 6:47 PM, Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:

> Jonny, Nairba's posts have made you into a very paramour of virtue.
>
> Jeffery Hodges
>
> From: jonnyangel <junkopardner at att.net>
> To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
> Sent: Tue, December 21, 2010 8:24:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [Milton-L] NO posts per day (in certain circumstances)
>
> Easy there. I'm still here y'know?
>
> Merry Christmas all,
>
> jonny
>
>
> On Dec 20, 2010, at 2:53 PM, Gregory Machacek wrote:
>
> > I second Alan's suggestion that if we find exchanges like the one  
> with
> > Nairba Sirrah futile and exasperating, longtime members of the  
> list might
> > be able to do something to shorten such fruitless conversations:   
> bite our
> > electronic tongues and not reply.
> >
> > In my time on this list, the Nairba Sirrah case is the third such  
> instance
> > I can remember.  There was a "jonny angel" and a "shrike."  They  
> all ran in
> > much the same way.  In each case the person was new to the list.   
> In each
> > case, the offensive poster was not a professional scholar of  
> Milton, but an
> > amateur enthusiast.  In each case, the newcomer hadn't spent any  
> time
> > observing the protocols of this discussion list, but immediately  
> started
> > conducting himself along the lines of participants in some  
> political blogs,
> > where every post emerges out of the poster's absolute certainty  
> about the
> > way things are, and alternate viewpoints (let alone corrections  
> of any
> > sort) prompt indignant, vehement, acerbic retaliations.
> >
> > In each case, members of this list assumed the interloper could be
> > persuaded to be properly respectful of the scholarly credentials of
> > longtime members of the list.  They never were.  In each case,  
> the newcomer
> > had what I find a odd combination of traits:  on the one hand, a  
> tendency
> > to get insulted easily, to regard fairly neutral or even polite  
> responses
> > to his posts as personal attacks; but on the other hand, absolute
> > self-confidence when it came to the accuracy of his own  
> viewpoint.  The two
> > traits resulted in the posters adopting an I-can-give-as-good-as- 
> I-get
> > stance.  They all defiantly refused to back down from the attacks  
> they felt
> > they were receiving for merely expressing their own views.  The  
> all prided
> > themselves on their tell-it-like-it-is candor.
> >
> > Longtime listmembers sometimes responded in ways that were  
> themselves snide
> > or dismissive, but even neutral or polite responses were miscast as
> > insults.  My point is this:  there is NO way of responding to  
> such a person
> > that won't cause the vehemence and hostility (and number of  
> posts) to
> > escalate.  Except (perhaps) NOT RESPONDING.  It takes two to tango.
> >
> > I sketched the above portrait in some detail because I think that  
> part of
> > our challenge involves recognizing such cases as quickly as we  
> can.  That
> > and being willing to fight our knee-jerk reaction to correct
> > confidently-asserted inaccuracies.
> >
> > Ye have what I advise.
> >
> >
> >
> > Greg Machacek
> > Professor of English
> > Marist College
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  From:      alan horn <alanshorn at gmail.com>
> >
> >  To:        John Milton Discussion List <milton- 
> l at lists.richmond.edu>
> >
> >  Date:      12/20/2010 12:57 PM
> >
> >  Subject:    Re: [Milton-L] One post per day?
> >
> >  Sent by:    milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I do not believe this is a case of someone being ignorant of basic
> > social and scholarly norms. It is clear to me that the individual in
> > question is in great pain and deserves our sympathy and respect.
> >
> > Once it became evident that patient factual corrections were being
> > perceived as personal attacks, it would have been better if  
> others had
> > recognized the nature of the exchange and resisted the temptation to
> > respond IN ANY WAY. But that may be too much to ask.
> >
> > The moderators’ actions were necessary and appear to have been  
> handled
> > in a sensitive way. If this happens again I hope list members will
> > realize what is going on and deal with it in the way I have  
> suggested.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Milton-L mailing list
> > Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> > Manage your list membership and access list archives at
> > http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
> >
> > Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Milton-L mailing list
> > Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> > Manage your list membership and access list archives at http:// 
> lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
> >
> > Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at http:// 
> lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>
> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at http:// 
> lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>
> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20101221/c9c63106/attachment.html


More information about the Milton-L mailing list