Gloria Monti writes:
>Engaging in this kind of exchange -- asking a question that a student in
>an intro. to film studies course might have prior to writing their final
>paper -- seriously undermines Screen-L's credibility, I think as a forum
>for serious discussion.
In the moderator's defence and writing as someone who co-moderates a list
myself (one for members of a major political party's local organisation,
most of whom know each other in the flesh, so you can imagine that some of
the 'debates' become problematic to put it mildly - some people just don't
get the fact that online equals on the record), the boundaries between on
topic and off topic can get fuzzy, especially in relation to the 'level' at
which a debate is held or originally pitched. In many cases the same
question could legitimately be asked by an undergrad student and a
postdoctoral researcher, albeit in an attempt to elicit very different
responses. I too thought that on balance, this one was pitched well below
the level of original research questioning, but these things are always
close to call. And sometimes it's worth letting something like this
through just in case anything interesting and unexpected results. As with
the umpire in a cricket match, no-one can please everyone all of the time.
>Let me add that I felt the same way about a question that came up a while
>ago, concerning assigning difficult feminist film theories in our courses.
If it's any consolation I've probably had more posts about feminist film
theory thrown out by the moderators of two or three lists than I've had hot
dinners. If you're wondering why, I'm sorry to disappoint you but I'm
going to refrain from putting the moderators on the spot by expressing my
views on the subject!
Northern Region Film & Television Archive
For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: