4.1102 On the War (mislaid) (3/55
Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Wed, 27 Feb 91 20:49:50 EST
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 4, No. 1102. Wednesday, 27 Feb 1991.
(1) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 91 20:44:24 EST (8 lines)
From: Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear <EDITORS@BROWNVM>
Subject: This digest
(2) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 1991 21:19 MST (7 lines)
From: LHAMPLYONS@cudnvr.denver.colorado.edu
Subject: civil rights/privacy
(3) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 91 08:37:18 EST (40 lines)
From: Bernard_van't_Hul@ub.cc.umich.edu
Subject: Werman
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 91 20:44:24 EST
From: Allen Renear <EDITORS@BROWNVM>
Subject: This digest
I lost track of a War digest earlier this month. Here it is now.
-- Allen
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------18----
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 1991 21:19 MST
From: LHAMPLYONS@cudnvr.denver.colorado.edu
Subject: civil rights/privacy
Surely the request for faculty to inform a Chancellor of "nationality"
(itself a meaningless term as used by said Chancellor) of Arab and
Israeli students is illegal? Where is the local ACLU?
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------50----
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 91 08:37:18 EST
From: Bernard_van't_Hul@ub.cc.umich.edu
Subject: [Werman]
Only somewhat more than a month ago, when George Lakoff's
essay of January 6 was NOT IMPOSED on *Humanist* readers but
made available by one's request, R Werman was among the very
first to protest -- in this fully quoted response:
"I feel," Werman said, " that there is no room for a
politically motivated paper -- of such inordinate
length [sic], no less -- as that of Prof. Lakoff's on
the Humanist Net.
I voice my strongly felt disgust and disappointment
that the Net be used cynically for such unscholarly
purposes."
Since Werman voiced his disgust, *Humanist* readers
have been receiving Werman's a-politically motivated
diary of ordinate length written for scholarly purposes
-- its latter-day installments "protected" from cynical
abuses by the formulaic notice of "Copyright Reserved."
Having been apprised that although the legal and ethical
illocutionary force of Werman's appended caveat is unclear
to *Humanist* editors themselves, and that the caveat may
have been advised by the publisher interested in or
committed to making a book of his diary, I hope that by
*Humanist*'s forthcoming "New Statements of Policies on
Commercial Postings, Copyright,...[etc.]" one will be
advised on how, except by buying the Werman book, one is
meant to live up to letter and spirit of Werman's caveat.
I suppose that in Werman's acknowledgements one will read
gratitude expressed -- and not merely to named respondents
to earlier drafts, such as Koren, et al., but also to
*Humanist* subscribers en masse who surely deserve at least
the passing nod that is commonly nodded to spouses and
other unnamed secretarial midwives to the birth of a book.