At 09:14 10/03/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Ajit wrote on Tue, 10 Mar:
>
>> Hello All! I'm coming back after a few months, and don't know what has
>> gone on while I was away. <snip>
>
>Welcome back, Ajit!
>
>> On a completely another note: Did we come up with any decision on ope-l
>> archives? <snip>
>
>To refresh everyone's memory:
>
>1) The most recent discussion regarding whether the archives should remain
> closed (i.e. for listmembers only) or be opened was in September,
> 1997. That discussion began with a proposal that I made on 9/13 (see
> [OPE-L:5454]).
>
>2) During September, there were 34 posts written by 18 listmembers re the
> proposal on the archives. Approximately two-thirds of those responding
> supported the proposal to open the archives. There was, however, a
> significant and growing (i.e. relative to other times we discussed the
> archives) minority who opposed opening the archives (and a couple of
> other members had ambivalent feelings on the issue).
>
>3) As I noted in "THE MONTH IN REVIEW [September, 1997]", I had hoped
> that we would continue that discussion in October and come to a
> decision -- aye or nay -- on the proposal. The anticipated discussion
> in October did not materialize and the issue has not been discussed
> on-list since.
>
>4) Since the archives were closed prior to the proposal and since the
> proposal was not decided upon (i.e. we did not have consensus and we
> did not have a vote), the archives remain closed.
>
>5) We do, however, have one precedent in which a listmember (Simon) asked
> if a student of his could be shown some posts from the archives on a
> specific subject. Since no one objected, it happened. I see no reason
> why that could not happen again.
>
>6) It seems to me that if we are to re-open this discussion then those
> favoring opening the archives will have to respond more directly to
> the concerns expressed by Duncan, Mike L, Paul Z, and others. I am
> still of the opinion that a compromise is possible that will satisfy
> everyone's concerns, but it will require a real attempt to reach a
> compromise.
>
>I hope the above answers your question.
>
>In solidarity, Jerry
>
>