Dear John.....

[gh]

Don't know about you guys, but we here at T&FN have loved this Board ever since we finally got it up and running (almost a year now!). Hope you're enjoying it too.

OK, now I'll drop the other shoe: one negative thing that the Board has done is choke off our supply of letters to the editor. I don't know that it's that people who usually write are now posting here instead (under pseudonyms) or if just being able to read letter-like material here satisfies their need for that kind of thing. But whatever it is, we're getting almost no mail.

The Board guidelines say we're free to publish in the magazine anything that's posted here, but that would be cheating. So, let me put out a minor plea to all you deep thinkers. Please take a few seconds to craft us a letter on something that's moving you mightily, either positive or negative. Send to [email protected]

Thanks!

[tafnut]

Re: Dear John.....

Not to make more work for you, but anytime you see something you like couldn't you just e-mail the poster (you have her/his address!) and ask to have the idea fleshed out a little in a letter format. I would think anyone here would be flattered by such a request. I ain't no deep thinker, but I certainly have opinions!

[Pego]

Re: Dear John.....

Second the motion.

[gh]

Re: Dear John.....

I don't think that's quite in the spirit of good journalism. The letters should reflect vox populi, not our interpretation of what people are saying.

edited to add PS--I don't even feel that comfortable "soliciting" letters to begin with!

[hijumpsteve]

Re: Dear John.....

Garry, why would it be "cheating" to publish anything that is posted here ? You sure have my permission to do so and I am sure 99.9% of everyone else would agree. Writing e mails to you guys is fine, but when we write stuf here, we KNOW that many will see it, whereas if and when people send you normal e mails, there is no assurance that they will be printed in the magazine, or even for sure read at your end. With this Board, we KNOW you are reading them, and we appreciate it too.

[Jon]

Re: Dear John.....

>not our interpretation of what people are saying.




But it wouldn't be your interpretation - you ask the people themselves to re-write their post in a more printable magazine-friendly way.

[gh]

Re: Dear John.....

>Garry, why would it be "cheating" to publish anything that is posted here ?>>

Because when you get letters to the editor in the normal way, the slant on things is determined by the writer. They care enough that they want to praise/bitch on whatever subject. We then take care (if we have too many letters) that we maintain the same ratio of plus/minus so that the "will of the people" is expressed accurately.

For us to cherry-pick posts off here would invariably skew them (no matter how hard we tried) towards things that supported our point of view to the exclusion of counter-thought. Believe it or not, we do care about getting it right, not just getting it the way we like it.

[MJD]

Re: Dear John.....

I agree with hijumpsteve,
>and you certainly have my permission to print anything I've posted on this
>board. BTW, I have also enjoyed this site very much since it opened, and I've
>learned a lot.

No need to give permission. By posting, you already have. Guideline number 8:

"8. T&FN reserves the right to quote you--without compensation--both on this site and in the magazine, Track & Field News, if you post here."

[hijumpsteve]

Re: Dear John.....

Garry, I feel like we are debating how many angels can fit on the tip of a needle, but why would you be able to "cherry pick" less with letters than with Board Postings ? And it's YOUR magazine... print want you want to ! You have our permission !!!

[kuha]

Re: Dear John.....

I understand GH's dilemma. I used to write letters to T&FN and was pleased as punch when they were published. Now, however, the magazine's editors are dealing with a monster of their own creation: the website, which gives the adrenaline rush of instant gratification/feedback, as well as the chance of some actual "conversation" with others of the "fraternity." (Before, that is, conversations inevitably run out of gas, go over the cliff, or veer into forbidden territory.)

[satch400]

Re: Dear John.....

Message board obviously better for SATCH ; DOUBT anyone would publish my letters eg my OBIT!

[tafnut]

Re: Dear John.....

hjs said it - you 'cherry pick' already when you decide which letters to print. You are thereby 'spinning' the letters page the way you want already. That's not a criticism - it's just the way it is. The postings here are quite often publishable as is (Spivey, much?), but it would not be cheating to ask the author to spruce it up a little. That way it would not just be a repeat of what's already here; it would be betterer.

[kuha]

Re: Dear John.....

Editing is useful in making things betterer, or even bestest... (sorry!)

[tafnut]

Re: Dear John.....

(psst, kuha, c'mere - it was intentional)

[kuha]

Re: Dear John.....

OK, if you say so. I've seen far worse grammatical manglings here that (as far as I could tell) were NOT intentional (or is Satch an avant-garde poet?). I just can't keep up...sorry...