Gerald Seligman wrote:
"I’m a bit puzzled by Sammy Jones’ and Albert Haim’s comments. The issues raised in the Code of Conduct and new principles are not some arcane positions unrelated to the ARSC constituency and membership like, say, what the Association’s response is to the endangerment of polar bears. In part these are responses to the actual experiences of ARSC members that are, by any measure, unacceptable. Quite a few of the emails in this chain have made clear that some members have been subjected to wholly unacceptable behavior."
I respond:
The bulk of my message was related to reaction to the Board's public statements (and reaction to Kurt's letter about them). I took no side on either position except to say that the original statements by the Board perhaps should not have been made, as they do not have much to do with record collecting or sound archiving. What they did do was stir controversy among ARSC membership.
In case I wasn't clear, I don't want to be part of an activist organization. My political beliefs are private, as are my thoughts on current events.
I don't expect ARSC to endorse or condemn them.
My beliefs and opinions on politics and current events must stay private, as I am paid to be a journalist, and am actually required by my job to take no side on issues we cover.
Gerald Seligman wrote:
"Is it your position that ARSC should not confront such behaviors and work to deter them?"
I respond:
Which behaviors are you talking about? I didn't address any behaviors. I did make my views on the proposed Code of Conduct known through the requested process for input, but that was a private communication, and not shared on this list. I hope anyone else who is interested in these matters will also submit their thoughts in that way, so they can be reviewed by ARSC decision makers.
Sammy Jones
|