Dott. Enrica Garzilli's Complaint

wagers at wagers at
Thu Nov 30 21:04:56 UTC 1995

Dear List Members:

Dott. Enrica Garzilli's second writes ...

>- The USENET NEWSGROUP CREATION COMPANION, an official document available
>  from states
>  clearly that, before including a mailing list in a CFV, the proponent
>  should make sure that most of the members of the mailing list are able to
>  receive and read the proposed group. I do not recall Mr. Wagers doing
>  that.

The proposed newsgroup - sci.philosophy.natural - will be accessible
through a, as yet unidentified, gateway; therefore, anyone with e-mail
access can participate. I have received requests for voting and other
information from list members.

>  He MUST include the complete CFV, if he wants to involve a mailing list
>  in his newsgroup proposal!

Well, here I have the option of following the guide or the advice of the
experienced, neutral votetaker and mentor. As a matter of fact, proponents
are routinely advised to post *pointers* to RFDs, CFVs, and FAQs whenver
possible, in order to minimize the impact on mailing lists and newsgroups.
There is much precedent for the procedure. I have done this. Surely, in
view of your reference to "bandwidth and mailbox estate", this makes sense.

>  At the same time, the flood of personal messages (some of them empty)
>  advertising his CFV that Mr. Wagers addressed to several people
>  interested in his mailing list project are irregular.

I still don't know to what this refers. On one occasion, I posted to a
private mailing list. A mail server error on my service provider pumped out
up to *thirty* copies of my e-mail before I discovered what was happening
and could get the service provider to correct it. Most experienced users
recognized the problem and reported it to me. I did have to unruffle a few
feathers of more recent or casual users, e.g. new students. However, Dott.
Enrica Garzilli never complained, so I assumed was unaffected. Could this
be the true source of the complaint? If so, we are dealing with a quite
belated and imagined injury. I was in no way responsible for the server
error, and did everything possible to correct and explain the problem.

>As Mr. Wagers wrote in his reply to Dott. Garzilli's complaint:
>"I corresponded, as I recall, on one day with Dott. Enrica Garzilli when
>looking for a host for a mailing list. The correspondence would have
>consisted of a single, brief enquiry from me, but Dott. Enrica Garzilli
>kept insisting for more information from me (while bringing me up to date
>on netiquette)."

>Instead, she offered our help and asked him some questions, in
>order to know more about the person she was going to work with. I am not
>good in academic politics, but I find Dott. Garzilli's replies perfectly
>legitimate and helpful.

I made no statement to the contrary. In fact, I am quite puzzled by the
change in attitudes from that correspondence to this. Also, I am not an
academician, so the responsibility for "academic politics" must lie

>After Mr. Wagers' requires, we asked our service provider for the cost and
>technical questions involved in creating a mailing list, we devoted part
>of our precious time ...

*All* our times are precious. I am hoping too precious to continue this.

> Unfortunately, we never got a reply from Mr. Wagers.

Is this about an imagined snub? I kept the offer on file, waiting merely to
make a decision. I might have responded sooner had I not been somewhat
befuddled by our previous comminications.

I apologize for not responding to Dott. Enrica Garzilli's offer sooner - I
shall do so now, off-list. I did not mean to offend the kind and generous
efforts on my behalf. I was simply trying to make a decision before

I also apologize - as I have had to do many times - for the mail server
error which resulted in inconvenience, confusion, and even expense to some
of my most frequent, and, therefore, favorite correspondents.

I reiterate my offer to discuss off-list any suggestions anyone may have
for improving communication with the list. I hope, for all our sakes, that
Dott. Enrica Garzilli and Arch. Ludovico Magnocavallo will avail themselves
of the offer and avoid troubling the list further.



BTW: Arch. Ludovico Magnocavallo's quote couldn't be more appropriate:

>   Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics,
>   because the stakes are so low.
>                              Wallace Sayre


More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list