Thu, 13 Oct 1994 22:47:01 -0500

I am in complete agreement with Tom Riley concerning moderation of
the list. Hugh Jarvis and others have put an extraordinary amount of
work into creating and maintaining this forum, and we should certainly
respect their wishes. This also applies to the Tedlocks and AA. It
was the membership who made them editors, and we should be thankful
to them for taking on what is often a thankless task. I am one
archaeologist who actually LIKED the last issue. I disagree with
the interpretation that it contained no archaeology. Michael Dietler's
article WAS archaeology, and very good archaeology at that. I have
passed it on to a Central American graduate student who is also
interested in the intersection of archaeology and nationalism, and
he found it stimulating. He in turn passed it along to a colleague
who is a historian. If there's anything AA should be doing, it's
stimulating graduate students and and communicating across disciplines.

Back to moderation of the list... If Hugh Jarvis wants the list to
be apolitical, then it should be so. If his motives for keeping
certain discussions off the list are themselves political, well
perhaps that's none of our business. However, there are many
individuals who participate in the list because of the perception
that it's an open forum for the expression of ideas and opinions
about anthropology (within the bounds of civil discourse). Dwight
Read's comments cast doubt on the validity of that perception.
It would be nice to know he's mistaken.

John Hoopes
Associate Professor
Dept. of Anthropology
University of Kansas