The suggestion raised by Jan Houben resembles a similar proposal made on
the list Buddha-l some time ago. Given the tendency toward unbridled
conversation on Buddha-l, it was suggested that we begin another list to
which one might subscribe under similar parameters to those suggested by
Dr. Houben. Thanks largely to the efforts of Chuck Muller at Toyo Gakuen
University, such a list eventually developed under the title of
"Buddhist Scholars Information Network"
<http://www.egroups.com/group/budschol>,
perhaps more commonly known by its abbreviated name
"Budschol."
My sense is that the vast majority of subscribers to Budschol are
thankful to have a forum in which to raise succinct queries and receive
succinct answers; the list also serves as a conduit for announcements of
professional interest (university publications, fora, conferences, and
the like). Short book reviews and synopses of the contents of scholarly
journals are also posted regularly. I have personally found Budschol to
be tremendously helpful, and many others share my opinion.
It is crucial to note, however, that Budschol does not allow its
members to have extended email conversations on any topic, even a topic
of professional interest. The monitors politely ask that such
conversations be moved either to other lists or to personal
communications. Although such rules clearly hamper open-ended
communication, the presumption is that other lists (such as Buddha-l) can
more than easily meet that purpose. In this sense, Budschol is not a
replacement for Buddha-l, but rather a list that has taken on those
functions which Buddha-l was no longer able to fulfill.
I value highly many of the exchanges on Indology, but the sheer volume
and uneven quality of postings is such that I too am sorely tempted to
(once again) unsubscribe. If another list, similar in tone and structure
to Budshcol, were available for those involved in the academic study of
South Asia, I would welcome the change.
Yours,
John Dunne
At 22:32 11/16/00 +0100, you wrote:
>Before I unsubscribe for a while,
>a question to the subscribers of the Indology List:
>Wouldn't it be possible and desirable
>to transform this List
>into a list where
>knowledgable and useful messages
>(by professional Sanskritists & archeologists, historians
and
>anthropologists of South Asia)
>are the rule rather than an exception (last
>few months: less than 5% according to my personal count)?
>my suggestion:
>- lurking free for everybody;
>- posting only for those who are admitted; admission not if you feel
you
>"frequently read JAOS, JRAS, BSOAS, ABORI, JOIB, IIJ ..."
but if you can
>give the title, place and date of your dissertation/Ph.D. + titles of
three
>articles *published* in JAOS, JRAS, BSOAS, ABORI, JOIB, IIJ ...; a
list of
>those admitted as posters is accessible via the Indology homepage; if
others
>think they urgently have to post/ask something to the list they can
approach
>one of the admitted posters (who will be aware that their own name
will
>occur together with the outside message).
>- for all other messages there is a computer link/drainage system to
the
>Indian Civilisation List (which does contain interesting
discussions). This
>way scholarly communication will be more enjoyable and more
efficient, *and*
>it will become more interesting for those who only want to lurk. The
archive
>will become a repository of valuable communications rather than a
Recycle
>Bin of quick questions and remarks of the avicaaritaramaNiiya.
Personally I
>would prefer a very high threshold (e.g. 15 published articles) which
I
>don't reach, to the present situation with a too low threshold (given
the
>availability of the Indian Civilisation List).
>As far as I see, there need not be any extra work for the List
manager once
>admission is automatized (application according to set format; in
case of
>deceit etc. the person has to be removed manually). Another option
would be
>to split up the present list into a "professional" list and
a chatbox.
>If needed, such a professional list and the way to get it established
could
>be the topic of discussion at some future conference, e.g. ICANAS
(inclusion
>too wide) or World Sanskrit Conference (inclusion too narrow).
>In view of the excellent environment of this list (the Indology
website),
>the transformation of the present list is in my view to be preferred
to
>starting a new one.
>Comments, suggestions?
>Best wishes, Jan Houben
>
>Jan E.M. Houben,
>Research Fellow of the
>Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences,
>Kern Institute, Leiden University,
>P.O. Box 9515, NL-2300 RA Leiden
>J.E.M.Houben@LET.LeidenUniv.NL
=========================
John D. Dunne
Assistant Professor
Languages and Cultures of Asia
University of Wisconsin-Madison