Do y'all actually read messages before you reply them?
 
Consider the following message again after re-reading the message it was
replying to:
 
> In regards to the recent post about religion and politics having no place
> on the list....
> Well, maybe.
> But what about when they impinge on archaeology? Like legislation or
> controversies over [put a religion here] burial excavations or a host of
> other topics?  And what about archaeologists interested in research on
> the politics and religions of the past?
 
> It is not as easy as saying leave politics and religion out of it.
 
> In the public forum, archaeologists have to deal with both of these
> issues, especially in North America.  It would be a mistake to exclude
> these issues from discussion.
 
Message above was responding to this message:
 
> In reply to the comments being made about the "alleged" voting down of
> the 4th amendment: I've found the two topics which cannot usually be
> dealt with in a public forum without it degrading into a shouting match
> is personal preferences in (1) religion, and (2) politics.  This is
> an archaeological list discussion group. Unless directly related to
> archaeological concerns, let's try to keep these 2 topics off the
> list, hey?
>
 
Note the bit about "unless directly related to archaeological concerns."
 
But what's the use, the "Repliers" will have already fired off a dozen
postings without getting to that last sentence.
 
                                        John