Yes, please continue the list, Anita.

It's a valuable resource, and I enjoy most of the debates.
We continue to debate what "historical archaeology" is. I've been following HISTARCH for about a decade, and the debate has recurred several times. Sometimes I follow the arguments, sometimes I swear under my breath and delete.

As the list owner, you've rarely exercised your right to "nudge" and you don't have a heavy hand.
The original Marco Polo question was off-topic, and your original reply was civil. 

Each list has its own etiquette. Some newcomers bring different ideas of how lists should run, and are offended when their preconceived notions aren't borne out.
Please don't be run out by trolls-in-training.

Respectfully and gratefully,

Gwyn Alcock
Riverside, Calif.






________________________________
From: Anita Cohen-Williams <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 3:51:05 PM
Subject: Should HISTARCH continue?

Considering all the discussion around whether or not Marco Polo should
be included in a discussion of Historical Archaeology (i.e.
archaeology of the modern world, 1400 forward), I am wondering if I
should continue running HISTARCH.

I have been running this discussion list alone since 1994 without pay
from any source, as a labor of love. I am not a professor nor
librarian in any university, the SHA does not pay me (although they do
use this forum), and I am not an employee of any governmental agency.
Nor am I paid to run ArchaeoSeek, although several people have stepped
up and donated monies for the $20 a month that it costs.

In light of that, and the fact that, while I do keep an eye on the
discussions and attempt to keep them on topic, this list is NOT
moderated nor censored. Considering the current tone of this latest
discussion, I am wondering if it all was a waste.

-- 
Anita Cohen-Williams
Organic SEO and Social Media Marketing
http://www.mysearchguru.com
Twitter: @searchguru
Listowner of HISTARCH