Gary: It's perfectly possible. But, if you feel so, delete the posts of the thread. But, please, do not suggest to install a censorship here. Regarding the possibility of "resolving" this issue here, I think that in this forum, no issue had been "resolved" so far! As regarding "first-hand knowledge", I think people can provide their version and the interested ones can ask and discuss the point. The matter is important because it involves practices that, I feel, go beyond "Andrew's case". Frankly, I don't see why there is so reluctance in discussing this. A. At 15:52 15/02/02 -0500, you wrote: >Alejandro: Is it not possible that, like Mike, Patrick & I feel the topic >should be dropped because it has become tedious, because it cannot be usefully >resolved in a forum in which most of the participants have no first-hand >knowledge of the events under discussion, and because it can only serve to >widen rifts that we ought to work at healing? > >I'm leaving town, and will be away from e-mail for a few days. > >Regards, > >Gary > >>===== Original Message From Alejandro Ramos <aramos@btl.net> ===== >>Gary and Patrick: >> >>It seems to me you both are interested parts in this conflict given your >>relation with URPE and RRPE. This is not a mere "legal conflict" because at >>its *origin* there is a matter of the rejection of a paper by an ed board >>of the RRPE, right? It really doesn't speak well of the state of the US >>left that something like this had ended in the legal instances, but this is >>another matter. >> >>But more generally, as far as I understand, in this list there is no >>censorship. So any subscriber can discuss whatever issue she or he wants, >>no matter if it is "a legal conflict", the situation in Argentina, the >>methods for solving differential equations, the status of Marx's "law of >>value", or the weather in Belize City. >> >>Patrick's post, supported by Mongiovi, can be effectively read as proposing >>a kind of censorship here, something, I'm sure, it won't happen. The >>circulation of information cannot harm anyone. >> >> >>A. >> >> >>At 13:52 15/02/02 -0500, you wrote: >>>I agree as well, >>> >>> >>>Gary >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Patrick L. Mason [SMTP:pmason@garnet.acns.fsu.edu] >>>Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 1:47 PM >>>To: ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu >>>Subject: [OPE-L:6591] Re: RE: [Andrew Kliman] Open Letter to OPE-L >>> >>> >>> >>>Jerry: >>> >>>I'm in agreement with Michael Williams. OPE-L should not be used to forward >>>messages concerning legal conflicts, or resolutions of legal conflicts, or >>>celebrations of legal conflicts between Andrew Kliman and the Editorial >>>Board of URPE. >>> >>>peace, patrick l mason >>> >>> > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Mar 02 2002 - 00:00:05 EST