Posted by Dan the Book Man on March 24, 1999 at 21:11:09:
In Reply to: Re: chats posted by Lester M. Levy on March 21, 1999 at 19:22:48:
Having been the one "censored" in the past, I feel it necessary here to throw in my two cents.
First, Gary offers us an EXCELLENT service here, and if it leads to his profit, so be it! He deserves profit for setting up this web page and generously giving of his time and site space to maintain it.
Next, to Lester, if you didn't read my posting, I would appreciate it if you didn't attempt to summarize it. No one ever called for a "boycott" of print dealers generally! What I said was that the destruction of books for profit motives is a sad thing, and we as buyers share in the responsibility for supporting this practice. I asked that people boycott auctions of pages torn from books--and not Shogun's auctions in particular, but also eBay and others--but, I repeat, BOOK PLATE AUCTIONS, certainly not "dealers generally". This was the point that seemed to have been missed originally, and let to the deletion of my posting.
To put the finishing touches on that episode, Gary patiently explained to me his reasons for selling book plates, and I explained to him my purpose in posting my note, and we have each come to understand each other a little better I think. One of more example of the useful function of this page.
LONG LIVE CHATS!
: : These chats are a very valuable source of information thanks to the cooperation of many independent experts, who devote a lot of time and energy to answering questions and posing new and interesting questions themselves.
: : However, indirectly the cooperation of these experts lends prestige and credibility to a commercial site, helping it to attract new customers.
: : Wouldn't it be more ethical for these experts to chat at a non-commercial site?
: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: AJ declares that he or she finds these chats very useful, but suggests that the ethics of the contributors are somehow deficient because they indirectly enhance the commercial sponsor who owns the web site.
: The kindest interpretation would be that AJ possesses a fine ethical sense which all the others have somehow overlooked. My take is that this implies a stereotypical bias (usually called prejudice) rather
: than a willingness to examine each situation with its own unique set of parameters.
: Is the chat site useful? Clearly, the answer is yes, as even AJ acknowledges. Since participation is absolutely voluntary, all the readers and writers must find this true equally.
: Has Shogun interfered with the free expression? Clearly, the rules are directed to keeping this site free of self-serving, commercial interest. The one quoted episode of mild censorship was directed at
: preventing an attack and request for boycott on print dealers generically.
: Is Shogun unfairly benefiting from this chat group? If we feel more kindly toward Shogun because of its sponsorship, that is an attitude only each one of us can engender in ourselves. If any enterprise,
: commercial, non-profit or government performs a good deed, then they should receive credit.
: Lester M. Levy