Print

Print


With a huge amount of respect, I vote for you to do the description. Seems to me your detached and knowledgeable perspective qualified you more than anyone else.

Thank you for all your help in following up Tom's push to reawaken the list.

Also, speaking as one who has done a few web pages over the years, the old Eliot page was itself pretty amateuristic; the content was fine but the style was kinda sterile. I don't claim to be a pro. but as a mcluhanite I do mark the good ones and what makes them effective.

And thanks very much to Tim for All that helpful info.

Cheers,
Peter.

"Rickard A. Parker" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>1. I got copies of most of the old server's archives in various formats.  I
>think I can find them again. I'll have to find out how the messages are
>stored on the new list server. I'll see what I can find out in LSOFT's
>documentation. I don't anticipate changing the format of the messages to be
>a big deal (but then it is software.)
>
>2. Someone volunteer to come up with some preliminary text for a description
>of TSE (please add that it isn't like Jolly Roger) and I'll add it to my
>"Exploring T.S. Eliot" portion of my website.  Since my site is established
>that would give the page some extra search engine points.
>
>On Thu, 1 Aug 2013 18:41:25 +0000, Materer, Timothy J.
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the helpful discussion of the problems on the list. I will try
>to address them, but the co-owner of the list, Greg Foster, is the person
>who founded the list and the web page. He understands all the technicalities
>involved. Unfortunately, he lost interest in the list and deleted his
>membership in it years ago. Yet he is proud of having created the list and
>often tells me he will address the problems I have been bringing to him. (I
>handle trivial problems such as adding new members to the list and changing
>addresses when needed.) There are two major problems, or three if one
>considers lack of general participation a problem.
>>
>>1. The problem we have been trying to address recently is the loss of the
>pre-2001 archives. Why they were eliminated by the Missouri listserv is a
>mystery to me. Perhaps they just thought that anything pre-21st century was
>insignificant! Greg had the archives backed up, but not in a form that could
>easily uploaded--apparently. For some months, Greg seemed to be working on
>putting them in the right format, and a few early archives have been
>restored. However, Greg has not been answering my emails lately, so I don't
>know what is happening right now.
>>
>>2. A long-standing problem has been the loss of the TSE web page. Again,
>I'm not sure why things appear and disappear in the depths of cyberspace. It
>may have involved  the new listserv software the university bought into, or
>it may have fallen victim to one of their campaigns to tidy up university
>web space. Once it was gone, Greg was reluctant to put up a new one. His
>feeling, I think, may have been partly influenced by the Eliot estate
>refusing permission for the site to feature Greg's concordance to the
>complete poetic works.
>>
>>For years, I kept expecting him to restore the page. When it didn't happen,
>I suggested to David Chinitz, then president of the TSE Society, that it be
>moved to the society's web page.  David wasn't eager to take it on, but
>might have if Greg hadn't felt that it would be too bad for it to leave
>Mizzou, and I felt that way too. But still no web page. I designed one
>myself, and Greg very rightly pointed out that it was amateurish. I then
>offered $200 to some of Greg's students to design a page, but Greg told me
>that they too lost interest!
>>
>>3. Critical mass? It would be nice to have the participation we had in the
>20th century. But most lists never had that kind of participation. My James
>Merrill list goes months without a message. But when a new publication or
>conference or news item comes up, the list is invaluable for its members,
>the vast majority of whom are so-called lurkers. It might help to think of
>the list as a Bulletin Board rather than a Discussion List. As for the
>current value of the list, I have learned a great deal from the active
>members who alerted us to new publications, and real discussion frequently
>does take place that is rare on any of the many other lists I belong to.
>--Concerning the members who have left the list, the complaint I hear at TSE
>meetings is that there are too many trivial posts. If that is true (trying
>to be tactful here), it's not a problem for me since I filter my posts into
>a separate mail box (one can also request a single daily digest post); and 
>(which is crucial to relevant discussion) as long as Subject lines are
>accurate. The separate mail box or digest form allows one to screen the
>posts and open only those of list members or with subject lines that
>interest you.
>>
>>How then to deal with problems 1 and 2? When the univ. starts up again, and
>I can reach people in person, I'll let you know.
>>