Hi Bob,

I'm purposely replying to you privately to try and avoid rekindling this
conflict. And sorry for the delay between your post and this response: I was
late for a Canadian Thanksgiving get-together when I first read it, and had
to leave before finishing this post.

It's quite infrequently that our list goes into these nastily angry waters,
and while part of me quite enjoys a good catfight on issues, another
doesn't; I also want to limit the damage it does in polarising what is
already a fairly atomised movement.

You raise good points. I've noted that birders are often loathe to speak
that discouraging word no matter how salutary it might be, but I've also
noted how difficult things can become when people tiptoe around or refuse to
face any issue, in or out of birding.

>Forums are forums and sometimes personal accusations obscure the issue and
>detract from the mission. Very unfortunate. Birders need to be outspoken,
>accurate and flexible. I have found your postings to meet those standards.
> Thanks for your info and perspective, long may it be offered to us.

Thank you! This is my goal. I let some of my personal feelings show in this
latest exchange, though, and I'm not happy at that. My nearly fifteen years
in this local society, I'm afraid, have sensitised me to anything from that
organisation. Those non-involved would be well-justified in reading some of
these posts and wondering where *that* came from. It was only because I felt
my loyalty was to the membership--which was supportive, except for a small
faction of hardcore listers--rather than to that in-group's consensus that I
was able to tolerate its cant and connivings, its disingenuousness, its
stifling bureaucracy.

But the term 'crank' is, sadly, not too far away from application to me when
I think about them. This is, I think, how many of those people with bees in
the bonnet are created. Bad treatments, unheard and unresolved grievances.
Someone once said that a nation's history freezes when it loses a war, and
won't/can't move past it until it either wins the next or there is an
overwhelming, cathartic reconciliation (and even then--). Since the national
reaction is an abstraction of the aggregate personal response, much the same
process occurs.

>Sincere personal, supported disagreement without personal attacks should be
>savored and nurtured.

Yes, indeed, though I'm hoping that the need comes rarely: some is fun and
bracing; too much corrodes good manners and impairs discourse. I think the
list is healthy enough to retain its good sense and nature in spite of the
occasional outbreaks of controversy.

>Thanks for your past comments, I look forward to more in the future. I
>trust others feel similarly.

Again, Bob, thank you for your kind words.

M