Lief Henricksen's communication standards

carter pate (CPATE@UTCVM.BITNET)
Thu, 16 Feb 1995 12:48:46 EST

If all 700 readers of anthro-l posts understand English, making it the easiest
way to communicate with them all, there is an inherent advantage in using
English to communicate with them. Is there any need to erect standards or
norms beyond this? It seems to me that events in Chiapas are portentious
enough that prompt communication in Spanish is justified, just as I'd feel that
similar material inany other language might be appropriate. As in my post of
Wed., Feb. 14, however, I would hope for some filtering out the header "chaff"
to enable us to make our own judgments on credibility, but clearly indicating
the sources of forwarded materials.
By the way, I'm intrigued by the references to an article on the
Chase Bank in COUNTERPUNCH. Having never heard of it, and not recognizing the
authors' names, I'd appreciate comment (private or listwise). Who are its spon
sors, or where does it fit on any reasonably descriptive political spectrum?