You are not alone...I share your opinion and I have, in several instances,
privately corresponded with her expressing my thanks for sharing her
perspective. I want more than lists, and what Connie provides often gives
me that sense of perspective.

Roger Olstad
Lake Forest Park




> From: "carenp" <carenp at totalise.co.uk>
> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 07:43:21 -0700
> To: "tweets" <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
> Subject: RE: [Tweeters] Some guidance
>
> personally, i have to say that ms sidles posts (and those of a few others
> here) are those i await with much anticipation. they tell everyone her
> story regarding her experiences with birds. surely, there is a place for
> such on tweeters, as well as there is a place for those who are more
> interested in acquiring life lists through competitions, or delineated by
> neighbourhood or county, state or country?
>
> who says tweeters must be a place where all you do is mechanically report on
> what was seen? why can't tweeters also be about HOW you felt, or what you
> experienced in your soul, when you saw the bird? isn't the reason we watch
> birds in that we are fascinated by what they are, what they do?
>
> if you don't like a particular person's view on the world, or the way they
> dress or type or post, etc, you should exercise your personal ability to
> remove them from your sight by depressing the DELETE THIS EMAIL key. it's a
> bit like the ability to change the channel when you see something on the TV
> you don't like. you can even automate the process in most email programs by
> making a rule that basically states "there's a post by connie sidles or
> caren - delete it immediately upon receipt so i never even know it is
> there".
>
> please remember: your viewpoint is not the only one here, and while your
> complaint MAY be valid, unless you are an admin, it's not for you to make
> that determination. i would suggest that if you have an issue with a
> particular author's post, you should take it up privately with the
> administrators of the list. i'm sure they will deal with it, or not, as
> they see fit.
>
> for what it's worth: it is my opinion (perhaps alone amongst all) her posts
> are worth more than mechanical recitations, in the same way an accountant's
> financial report on the wealthiest man in the world is long forgotten though
> a shakespeare poem stands the test of time... but, you see, that's only my
> opinion. your mileage may vary.
>
> 00 caren
> http://www.parkgallery.org
> with an opinion from near JBP
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tweeters-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu
> [mailto:tweeters-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu]On Behalf Of Connie
> Sidles
> Sent: Wednesday, 2005 September 28 02:47
> To: tweeters at u.washington.edu
> Subject: [Tweeters] Some guidance
>
>
> Hey tweets, "Almost human" (see post below) raises an issue about what we
> should be posting to tweeters. I would like to know, both from the
> listmaster and perhaps from any of you, what our guidelines should be in
> this regard. I think of tweeters as a community of birders, and I think, as
> a community, we should decide what kind of a forum tweeters should be. -
> Connie, Seattle
>
> csidles at isomedia.com
> ----------
>
> So again why don't you please start a blog. You can even announce it as a
> "birders blog". Just please can we have Tweeters back...
>
> I'm sorry you are way out of line with this post as a Tweeters post!
>
> PS... I do not need to hear back from you on this matter by the way, I'm not
> interested in your "excuses".
>
> almost2human at earthlink.net
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.8/113 - Release Date: 2005.09.27
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tweeters mailing list
> Tweeters at u.washington.edu
> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters