Subject: Re: tc-list A Lamentation and A Warning

From: Jim West <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:30:34 -0400

At 06:26 AM 9/18/99 -0700, you wrote:

>However, the real point of my original post, is that we Americans need to
>take care of what we have, and this may not involve you.  As far as
>"contracts" are concerned, we allow for others to use the films, we
>circulate them, that is how contracts were arranged here. Why not there? For
>more go off line, as I do not want to become too obsessed with Munster's
>monopoly, to me it is a crime. I think perhaps you ought to question your
>own institutions, they may share the truth with you, or they may not.
>
>at your service,
>Mr. Gary S. Dykes

How odd.  I thought the days of American "Splendid Isolationism" had died
decades ago.  The tone of Gary's post borders on the near offensive- as it
denotes a sort of arrogance which we can ill afford in today's world.
Nationalism and the like are fine so far as they go- but utterly
unproductive when it comes to sharing scholarly resources.  Munster has
EVERY right to refuse to mail things!!!  I wouldnt mail a valuable
manuscript film to the next town!  In illustration- I was sent a book by a
colleague in Canada.  The package arrived- with some book I had never heard
of in it!!!  After putting a trace on the book, we discovered that envelopes
had been opened at the postal service and my book and another had been put
back in the wrong pacakages!!!!  Can you imagine some slack jawed mouth
breather in upper slobonia getting a Munster film by mistake while Mr Gary
gets the latest issue of Field and Stream with the expanded hunters guide to
wild duck....

Munster has every right to do with its holdings what it pleases.  It is
ridiculous to claim otherwise.

Best,

Jim
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
email- [email-masked]
web page-  http://web.infoave.net/~jwest

---

From: Jim West <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 14:14:44 -0400

At 06:37 AM 9/19/99 -0700, you wrote:

>To coin a phrase, what's your point?

My point, Dave, is that it has always been the case that folk with resources
have access to things that folk without resources dont have.  Is this fair?
Yes.

Best,

Jim