Teresa,
I agree with your take on how people should behave.
I disagree that this is only a Pacific NW group and that someone outside
this area should not be counted. If this is the case we need to qualify
what is the Pacific NW. Do we want this to be an exclusionary group and if
that's so, where are the lines drawn?
I belong to other groups that encompass other areas of the world. I have
found them to be very accepting of people who visit(?) It's a great joy to
have communication with these groups. Sometimes vicarious thrills have to
do. I would hate to be shut out because I'm not from the area.

Barry Levine
Seattle
levineb at belnet.bellevue.k12.wa.us

On Tue, 24 Nov 1998, Teresa Michelsen wrote:

> I think the issue here is not that East Coasters are necessarily
> jerks, but that this is a list for Pacific NW birders - what
> someone outside this area thinks is not necessarily material
> to the group. So, as I read it, the two adjectives were unrelated
> (I'm NOT passing judgment on whether they were deserved).
> And I agree, not everyone from this area acquitted themselves
> with respect and eloquence. Whatever happened to scholarly
> discourse, or at least professionalism and maturity? I have
> found myself wincing at many of the posts lately, and making
> greater use of my delete key.
>
> This is my plea for those who feel they must
> rise to every provocation to do so in private e-mails, rather
> for everyone else's reading annoyance. We've long ago learned
> the views of certain members on creationism, free speech,
> swearing, abortion, cats, hunting, etc. Why these posters think
> we would be interested in hearing about this over and over
> each time a new member makes an innocent but provocative
> statement, I have no idea. Just my two cents. PLEASE,
> if you feel you must reply, do so off-Tweeters. I'll be happy to
> take your wrath (or commiseration) in private.
>
> Wishing for a more enjoyable discussion - Teresa Michelsen
> avocet at halcyon.com
>
>