[Reader-list] a thought

[Nazneen Anand Shamsi]

Dear Aarti,

Could I suggest that what appears to you as an 'institutional obsession'/
'irritating'/ 'intellectually lazy'  argument may in fact be an 'appeal to
authority'. In a virtual world where this list floats, with nameless places
and place less names, the only clear and distinct sign which appears to me
was a sarai.net address. This is a sarai.reader list and I think it is
common sense to address my raves and rants concerning the list to the most
visible  and perhaps the most stable of all landmarks. I agree with you
completely that sarai's institutional stake is limited to providing a
context. And I laud this, 'gesture' but ultimately when push comes to shove,
as in Radhikarajen's instance, it was left only to the discretion of list
admin to take a call. I do not at all contest that those who work at sarai
should judge how other members on this list should utter or articulate, they
have not right to but at the same time I don't see any reason why I should
not direct my rants for punitive action to a sarai.net address. It makes
more sense to one to write to the non-interventionist Sponsor of this list
than to address them to a fsrnkashmir at gmail.com or
aashu.gupta20 at gmail.comnot because by directing to these mail address
I would be diluting the issue
but because I guess by deliberately dragging sarai's name I hoped to provoke
perhaps a lot more people, which include those who subscribed to reader list
before they joined sarai, continued their subscription while they were at
sarai and still subscribes when they are not part of sarai. One may consider
it as a deliberate strategy for poking and unruffling feathers for a
discussion/reaction on an issue of relevance. I don't see why any concerned
person should not do so as well. I support mass mailing sarai.net adders to
take some action regarding exchanges on reader list. Of course, what remains
unsaid is that, in such a case one would eventually mass mail reader list
too. Which was the intended objective.  I have always believe that one
should make a lot of noise if one is uncomfortable with the way in which
things are being done. I consider this strategy far more engaging and an
exercise in thinking together than say, for instance, without sounding rude
to you, writing intellectually engaging stuff like- 'Enough. Just. Shut. Up.
Be. Quiet. Do Not Speak. You embarrass and insult yourself.' But of course
this was written with respect to a specific context but still, the above
remark pertains very much to a broad discussion concerning how we engage on
the reader list.

Warm regards

Nazo

On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Aarti Sethi <aarti.sethi at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think this is a good idea but I am not entirely convinced. I fear it
> might lead to a situation in which conversations might dry up quite fast
> because often an exchange consists of people responding quite quickly to
> positions. Are we sure we want to impose a moratorium this strict wherein it
> becomes impossible for me to engage with six mails I might wish to, or
> respond to a thread where several people are coming in at the same time. I
> also recognise though that in a moment  marked by the excess of too many
> words some economy of articulation would be very welcome. So can this be
> modified to say that I am allowed one response to an ongoing thread only,
> and one new thread which I initiate?
>
> best
> Aarti
>
> P.S And Nazneen, without sounding rude I am beginning to tire of your
> institutional obsession with Sarai. It has been made clear over and over
> again that Sarai's institutional stake in this list is limited to providing
> the context. This is as it should be. I used to work at Sarai, I do not
> anymore. My relationship with the list extends from before I joined Sarai,
> continued while I worked there, and sustains now that I do not. I see no
> reason why my stake in this list is reduced or altered because Sarai no
> loner happens to be my employer. Those at Sarai are not judges on high who
> will determine how everyone else who has spent as much time contributing to
> the discussions and general health of this list over now 7 years, nor should
> we force them to become that. I think in different ways those who work at
> Sarai and are members of the reader list have expressed tehir unwillingness
> and discomfort with this regulatory role that you insist on attributing to
> them. So please lets think together about this. I find this constant
> petitioning to Sarai very irritating and I also think its intellectually
> lazy.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Nazneen Anand Shamsi <
> nazoshmasi at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Vivek,
>>
>> Thank you for a thought provoking post. Undoubtedly yours is perhaps the
>> first instance, when we have someone from sarai.net seriously taking up a
>> initiative to put in place modalities of engagement, in his personal
>> capacity.
>>
>> I unhesitatingly endorse your move.
>>
>> Further on, I suggest that the list admin set a deadline of a week's time
>> for any discussion on this issue. After  the completion of such a
>> deadline,
>> this rule must come into pace. Despite Shuddha's insistence, in this
>> morning's riposte to Radhakrishnan's mail, I think, insofar as all of us
>> here who are non sarai.net, we expect some sort of initiative from sarai.
>> I
>> am certainly not in a position, none whatsoever, to dictate the terms of
>> engagement but nevertheless, I feel your suggestion needs to be taken up
>> seriously by all concerned.
>>
>> May I suggest that responses that belong to different threads be
>> restricted
>> to one post, instead of just one post a day. Regarding content, may I also
>> suggest that a provocation and its response must not include any ad
>> homenium
>> remarks. A similar warning must be issued against any such post, followed
>> by
>> dismissal.
>>
>> I would urge everyone one who is a regular sarai express junkie to respond
>> to Vivek's timely intervention.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Nazo
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Shahnawaz Khan <fsrnkashmir at gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > Sounds Good. Amazing if people would be able to hold their trash with
>> them
>> > for the night.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:38 PM, Aashish Gupta <aashu.gupta20 at gmail.com
>> > >wrote:
>> >
>> > > Completely agreed. Very innovative.
>> > > Aashish
>> > >  _________________________________________
>> > > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> > > Critiques & Collaborations
>> > > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>> > > subscribe in the subject header.
>> > > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> > > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>> > >
>> > _________________________________________
>> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> > Critiques & Collaborations
>> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>> > subscribe in the subject header.
>> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>> >
>> _________________________________________
>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> Critiques & Collaborations
>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>> subscribe in the subject header.
>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>
>
>