Proposal: A separate antedatings list

[Jesse Sheidlower]

On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 01:35:17PM -0500, Lynne Murphy wrote:
>
> But I also find some of the arguments against moving antedating
> conversations to the DSNA list to be weird.  One of the arguments seems to
> be that DSNA is a low-volume list.  Um, why is that a reason not to have
> antedatings there?  They could cope with more volume, ADS-L could do with
> less...sounds like a solution!

The argument is not that we should not move relevant material
to a low-volume list. The argument is that the existence of a
list, even in a field in which there is an active community
and many topics of interest, does not guarantee an active
list.  Thus, the worry (at least, my worry) is that declaring
that certain topics should be moved from ADS-L will cause
these topics to simply vanish. Would I rather an active,
vibrant ADS-L and an active, vibrant DSNA list? Yes. But would
I rather a less-active, less-vibrant ADS-L that has no
discussion of antedatings or regionalisms, and an inactive
DSNA list, and an inactive newly-created antedatings list? No.

Jesse Sheidlower

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org