VIEWS ON RLSOB GROUP & CENSORSHIP

(PLEASE REMEMBER WHEN MAILING TO RLS ALWAYS TO TRIM, TRIM AND TRIM YOUR E-MAILS AND KEEP THE JUNK DOWN ON OUR EXCELLENT LIST. DON'T BE AN ELECTRONIC LITTER BUG. AVOID THE RETURN BUTTON LIKE THE PLAGUE AND CUT/PASTE THE RELEVANT QUOTES YOU WANT INSTEAD. THANKS CHAPS.)

Subject: Old Libertians' Newsletter

The Old Libertians' Newsletter, September 2001, announces that the next Reunion at the School will take place on Saturday, 6 July 2002. Full details and Application Forms will be included in the January 2002 issue. Those who do not already receive it should contact: Ken Catton, 10 Margaret Avenue, Shenfield, Brentwood, Essex, CM15 8RF (Tel: 01277210433). Regards, ( J. Alan Smith)

Gentlemen: Having read the recent postings, I thought that I would try to get to the bottom of attendance protocol for this year's event.

I have now spoken with Ken Catton, the OB who started the re-unions.  Ken said that the reason for the Old Boys only stance was originally because of numbers.  The first event had 326 attendees.  With partners or a guest this would have made the event un-manageable and very crowded. Ken has indicated that this year's event will also be Old Boys only. However, he said that this issue will now be reviewed in light of numbers this time, and that the protocol may be changed at the next re-union. For my part, I understand his position and believe that his decision must be respected this time.  This may put some OB's off, but his have been the efforts so far.  He also produces a newsletter but, like very many older people, is not 'wired up.'

The position is particularly disappointing for my 'scary woman' - as Richard calls 'his.'  My wife, Katy, is the daughter of the former Head's Secretary, Barbara French, who sadly died last year.  Katy would love to attend this event, but accepts Ken's decision.  Many of you will remember her father too, Mick French, the CCF Captain who took over the cadets after Dick Baxter and John Tydeman.  Mick is himself an OB.  Just to keep the thing in the

family, Mick's son - Peter French - is also an OB.  Mick and I have been players for the Liberty Casuals Cricket Club, Mick in the 50's and 60's and myself from 1974 to date;  Peter also plays.  Rounding the family effort off nicely, my wife plays for the 'Casuals' fairly regularly, when she can get away from playing for Essex Ladies County Cricket Club that is. Pete Benson (you will all remember him) still plays for the 'Casuals' too, although his

pension book falls out of his pocket occasionally - distracting the opposition.  If anyone is interested in turning out for the Liberty Casuals Cricket Club, we play home games at the School.  A fixture card can be obtained from Martin Benson (Pete's nephew, also an OB) on 01277 650421. There will probably be a game there on the date of the re-union. (Alan Golding)

ON RLSOB LIST PRACTICES

I note that the Newth Prize for Mathematics is still awarded and - amongst other 'named' prizes - the Styles Prize for Science and Technology. That's in hono(u)r of your family presumably Geoffrey/Alan? I see also that there is an 'Old Boys [presumably the 'official' Old Libertians - Ed.] Cup for Outstanding Service to the School'. (Andy Lee)

Re: Resignations: MPL suggested that new members are set-up as "Alerts only" with the option of requesting either Daily digest or individual messages.

Regretably, this is not achieved easily. For those interested in the mechanics, read on ... The YahooGroups default on subscription is 'Individual E-Mails' and I have no control over that. In theory I ought to be able to sign up a new Member and switch him immediately from 'Individual' to 'Special Notices'. In practice there is, for some unfathomable reason, a time lag between the sign up and the Member appearing in the Membership listing (where I can change the options).

[Aside ... I am reminded of the astro-physicist's remark - "That's fine in practice but it doesn't work in theory."]

The time lag varies from 15 minutes to a couple of hours. Result ... (a) I have to remember [getting more difficult these days] and have the opportunity [not always available] to go back in and change the setting.

(b) The new Member may or may not receive a stream of individual messages (depending on traffic at the time) and then they stop ... until the next Special Notice - which may or may not be the 'New Members' announcement (depending on the delivery sequence of messages which, as we have observed before, is not always logical).

Confused?  I would be. In the personal 'Welcome' e-mail to the new Member I write in some detail about the variable nature and volume of our messages and explain the delivery options and mechanisms.  I trust that recent Members would confirm that those instructions are reasonably clear.

When a Member says he wants to leave (sometimes through the List, sometimes privately) I (a) switch his e-mail off as soon as I can, (b) write to him asking whether he would like to go onto Special Notices or leave the group altogether.  Happily a good proportion opt for the former. I'm sure you wanted to know all that. :-) Given the constraints I think the scheme described is about as good as it can be.  Suggestions for improvement sought, and will be gratefully received. (Andy Lee)

Yahoo offers an online 'chat' facility that we've not investigated. Perhaps a few volunteers (the past-midnighters?) might like to experiment and report back? It's at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLSOldBoys/chat (Andy Lee)

 I always write a short note to a resigning Member ... "If you have any comments about the content or the conduct of the List I'd be pleased to hear them." Some respond; others don't. Ben replied ... "There's nothing wrong with the group in general. I found that I had zero common ground with the others who are sending in messages, so I felt I was wasting my time trying to contribute. Nothing personal. Regards" (Andy Lee)

... as a very new member, I was initially overwhelmed by the number of messages and some of the subjects might just as well have been in the Latin which Johnny Bull somehow never quite managed to make me translate fluently. However, a week on and - although I couldn't say I make sense of all of them - the subjects are a little clearer, and even anecdotes from either side oy my era carry enough resonance to give me a twinge of nostalgia. And wallowing in that, whether we like to admit it or not, is surely what this excellent group gives us. (Chris Stratford)

Andy, and all you good gentlemen, I appreciate your candour. It must be difficult and an issue of some personal cost to be, or feel you are, responsible for this strange little group. I've not been involved for very long, but do find myself taking this list, the people on it and all your thoughts and feelings much more seriously than I had expected. It does exert an unexpectedly strong influence, doesn't it? Perhaps it's to do with constantly being drawn back to a time of confusion and insecurity, which is, surely, what adolescence was all about. We might now be a disparate band of widely-dispersed, largely middle-aged men with a whole bunch of other stuff to care about but -whoosh- there I am again, aged 15, with all that entails. Not always a comfortable place to be.
People leaving the group is really not your responsibility, Andy. You can't make this work for everybody, in every circumstance, at all times. You set the thing going, but it's developed a life of its own now, and everybody has their own reasons for getting, or not getting, involved.
On a practical note, there is, I believe, a real value in continuing to enjoy an opportunity for people separated by geography, age and all the other stuff to exchange views, stories, opinions and thoughts in this way and unrestricted by strict adherence to one particular subject thread. That is, surely, one of the unique opportunities that the Internet offers. The idea of two groups would seem to be a natural progression.
So that's my view. Let's keep this in perspective and try a new approach to using the strength of the group creatively. (Steve Snelgrove)

I agree entirely with Steve. The "club" is as it will be; it is not Andy's responsibility if people come and go - it is the responsibility of us all in what we make of it. Some of us talk too much - some of us too little; that is life.
If we change it, there is no guarantee that this will not push others away. In any case, if it becomes even more elaborate techno-nerds like me will probably lose the plot entirely!!!
Let's stay as we are, please. (Trevor Wiggins)

Unrestricted unsensibleness? Tangential leaps onto subjects of arcane and utterly irrelevant derivation? An opportunity for members to espouse their viewpoints on the sheer rubbishness of modern music....oh sorry, that's just me.
Members might still leave, though. Perhaps our esteemed moderator could concentrate on getting input from the many dormant members - it's possible that they are being put off by all the non-RLS stuff. They could easily take over.
RLS has to be the main thing, but it's a tad solipsistic to never deviate onto other issues. So a thread could begin on the "serious" list then branch out onto the other one, perhaps? I'm not conversant with the technicalities of moderating, so I don't know what's feasible. (Adrian Thompson)

I get the impression that most of us who actively participate in this group are agreed that we need to address the issue of extracurricular messages if we are to avoid further resignations and the intimidation of members who might feel that they are intruding if they try to take part in the conversation.
It would be a terrible shame if we lost the maths puzzles, the exchanges of information, the travelogues, the recipes and the acid banter but we should remember that the thing that brought us all together, apart from my brother, is the RLS and that is the one thing we know we all have in common. Personally I am happy to support any of the previously suggested alternatives but whatever we decide to do the answer and the responsibility is in our own hands.
We can avoid most of the problem if we all agree to clearly indicate the topic of our message in the subject line so that we can each edit our incoming mail according to our personal taste and interest. The mathematical conundrums usually bore me stiff but the thing that gets me mad is when I have to plough through what seems like the bulk of Principia Mathematica to find if there are any gems that might interest me. Mark the subject as Maths puzzle (or similar) and I can hit the delete button knowing I haven't missed anything of interest.
Take the time to clarify the subject rather than just hit Reply all the time and we could have a solution. (Graham Lee)

Some consolation words about wanting "out" from the List. It is tough, isn't it? After my first few days I thought I'd wound up in some silly boys' forum who couldn't let go, and the number of emails drove me crazy. The "I Scream, Man!" and the "Motor Psych All" sagas were my limit.

Still, I know I'm very resilient to certain changes so I stuck it out. Andy changed my status to receive the daily digest and I followed his advice by creating a special folder with automatic loading away from my inbox.

Suddenly, it all changed for me. The inbox problem disappeared, and I could work interrupted. I could choose the time to read the handful of digests, and it's easy to scan the contents list and skip to the messages that interest me on that particular day. Some of them are incredibly funny, and ANYTHING containing "Caning Handel's Messiah" has won my vote.

You're not alone with the Funky Dream-thang. I went home feeling sick in the stomach one evening, with nightmares to boot, because of the people and events I realised I'd forgotten, but it's only a short-lived natural adult reaction to opening old windows where there are old wounds. They heal real quickly, mate! Just remember: (Ian Macauley)

I can quite clearly see from the postings that nearly everyone who writes regularly, left RLS in late 1940's / 50's. So the question has to be asked as to why the 1980's has such a low turnaround of members in the group? Is it that by the 1980's the school had declined into such a state that no one wants to look back? Let me hear your thoughts. Well maybe this will certainly prove the theory of declining standards. During the late 1980's the school changed it's finishing time from 15:50 - 15:15. (Ben Levy)

As an in-betweenie in your dates (left '70, and proud of it) I have a personal observation. I tend to use email strictly for work. I don't have the kind of job where I can or want to devote much time to too much personal stuff. I'm already finding it difficult finding time to delete about 90% of RLS-msgs which don't touch my world. The greatest part of it looks to me like schoolboy sillyness, which is the exact reason I left the Lib after 5th form to "Get A Life". At the same time I read my own B-S and realize I'm no better - Girls Schools and Knicker Elastic and so on. To be fair I still have an eye for the ladies, as I did then, but I don't see that as schoolboyish, and in this subject I'm definitely a doer and not a dreamer.

It's a dilemma: if you want "in" then you have to take a lot of stuff you maybe don't want. I can imagine people around 20-30 looking at 90% of the messages and thinking "I don't need this, it's just schoolboy crap". But if you want "out", then you're going ot have to miss the fun side, and the sense of belonging that perhaps motivates us to some extent. I'm shocked by how people allow themselves to propagate some of the chains knowing the fact that they're adults, not schoolboys.

Ian, back in Stockholm after 5 days in Grenoble. Ain't life tuff! ... and sorry to be such a dis-loyal cold shower. (Ian Macauley)

Would the 'Daily Digest' suit you better Ian? One compilation per day which you could perhaps peruse at your leisure Say the word and I switch you over. (Andy Lee, viz. The Moderator)

Hi Andy, It's kind of you to think solutions for me. I felt like a boring ol' f*rt, but I guess that's what I am. I hadn't thought through about the single digest-per-day. I'll try the delete-button for a few more days. (BTW: Filter-2-folder is on, otherwise I'd have gone under). I'm struggling with the whole new friends-reunited world plus suddenly being an Old-Libber, so sorry all if I'm not up to your collective speed in this. Am I alone?

I may have got all my Math's O+A levels a year early, but my poor brain has to struggle with a business responsibility for over 300 Telecom systems on over 160 sites in over 100 countries. That's some serious email pressure on a tough day (reality check, there). Fanx, (Ian Macauley)

Reply to Ian's writing: "The other thing that I don't quite understand is why a lot of supposedly mature men in their 40's and 50's still sound like bratty schoolboys."

The first thing that an applying member sees is:

"This mailing list is a light-hearted opportunity for former pupils and former staff of The Royal Liberty School, Romford, Essex to reminisce about their school days, their school masters and their friends and colleagues."

"light-hearted ... reminisce ..."   Is this not an invitation to "sound like bratty schoolboys"?

Is this not the whole point of this group? What else are we here for?

* This group is a self-regulating organism ... sometimes it goes this way; sometimes it goes that way; always it goes in whichever direction the Members take it. How else could it be? (Andy Lee)

Ian wrote: "but someone recently suggested this method (of extracting the actual piece of text you're responding to) to keep the size of emails down, and I have to admit it makes sense.

That sounds like an excellent idea! I'd go with that. 'Trim, Trim, Trim' - as we say.  Some of us do. (Andy Lee)

"Is it that by the 1980's the school had declined into such a state that no one wants to look back?" This comment is open ended and by no means states my own final prognosis. Some of the younger members of the group may have something to say on this. No matter what we thought at the time, the fact that between us all we have such a wealth of memories of the school, means that RLS obviously left an impression on all of us. I know one guy who got straight A's in all his GCSE's and failed his driving test. Perhaps if he had done the test at RLS he would have passed that too! (Ben Levy)

I do enjoy participating in (mainly reading) the emails from ex-Libs around my era, and I find that if a particular string gets going that I'm not interested in, I just delete them based on the subject line. I really wish that some of the members would actually have something to say before they send out emails - For example - "Here, here" really doesn't do much for me. The other thing that I don't quite understand is why a lot of supposedly mature men in their 40's and 50's still sound like bratty schoolboys - and talk with pride of all the bad behaviour they were invovled in at school (and don't get the wrong idea, I'm still a big kid at heart) - oh well, I guess we're all different. I'll shut up now. (Les Farrow)

Ye Golden Ages: Can it be that the 'youngsters' of the group are too busy climbing the greasy pole, to have time for reminiscences of the past? (John Hawkins)

Knowing that everything we write is filed for posterity, imagine what will happen when dastardly fiendish foreigner hackers in future find out obout the RLSOB culture! Forget Greyfriars. Instead, magazines and cartoons to illustrate the antics of masters and pupils,  school photos in plain covers sold in dark Egyptian alleys or from dhows in the Suez canal, mass visits from Tokoyo to Hare Hall, statues of Scruff in Tianamen Sq., volumes bound in morocco leather of the Rubiyat of Michael Merry, old RLS caps, ties and blazers selling for thousands at Christies auctions to Taiwanese buyers. A knighthood for Andy Lee (well - both Seagoon and Eccles really got one! Hooray!) and OBEs for D. G. Maltby and G. A. Lee. Yes, the future is bright, lads, but careful what you write. Take this to be my latest application for the Camel, it must be on heat about now! (Robert Priddy)

Concerning the institution of the 'Camel Award' for the 10,000'th posting on RLSOB:

I had a dream! I had a dream! Last night... a very dry one, too. In a burning desert awaiting the arrival of someone, something. Over the dunes came three figures dragging a reluctant beast, a camel. They were the three wise men of the West, and though I can`t describe their features... they had a distinctly RLS air about them. One of them was chanting something like the Koran, but gradually I heard that it was my old class` roll call "...Patrick, Pedlar, Priddy..." I reached up my hand upon hearing my name, croaking out the words "Walter, walter everywhere, nor any drop to drink" (echoes of Wally, I suppose). The three figures melted into a mirage, leaving the camel - which seemed to be of the tight-skinned sub-species - testily eying me...

That`s it. I awoke to find grim reality staring me in the eye. Ten mails and still no camel! But I have a dream, I have a dream...

(Robert Priddy)

PS. Dreams become nightmares – the Camel was won by J. Alan Smith instead! Now I know who the three RLS types I dreamt about were - David, Andy and the Big Brother Winner himself...  More like the three streetwise men of the West, in waking reality!)

CENSORSHIP OR NO?

After a number of postings about bullies, esp. one Brian Hallett, (see under the thread "Bullies...") whose school exploits were, if correctly described, definitely of the bullying 'psycho' category, if not worse.. - and after Steve Hyde  suggested recruiting the (allegedly reformed) Hallett to the group,  Robert Priddy mooted the idea of removing  comments potentially hurtful to him from the archives. The following exchange of views took place:-

The discussion about Brian Hallett - pro and con - suddenly seems rather sensitive in view of the fact that Steve Hyde intends to try to recruit him to the list. Therefore I propose deleting all reference to him from the 'Bullies etc.' thread (it is all stored away in the files and can be found by the 'Search' facility, I know, and that is presumably undeletable?). It seems wrong to be discussing a person who we now know is out there - sometimes it is perhaps best to just let the past is the past. We couldn't know then... but I recommend we end this thread now. (Robert Priddy)

I see Brian Hallett fairly regularly at Brentwood Football Club where he is coach to one of the teams. Although he was a couple of years above me at the Lib we often raise the subject and remember those happy schooldays along with various other ex-Libs who are also involved with the club. Brian has had his own very successful Accountancy business for a number of years - I'll see if I can "recruit" him to the group ! (Steve Hyde)

Given that I see from today's postings that Brian is about to be invited to this group !!!! and is on my 'Manor' I confrim that I have decided not to comment any further. In fact I didn't say anything at all really - I just raised a few innocent observations and didn't mean anything by it, my memory is completely unreliable these days, I am sure I got it comnpletely wrong, I have a wife and two kids..... I wish I had not been so complementary about our archives. (Greg Cooper)

Now now chaps, Brian is a thoroughly decent bloke theseadays! ...perhaps we should also try and sign up Martin Binks ??? Answers on a postcard please to... (Steve Hyde)

I don't like to bear grudges, and certainly don't want to cause any unnecessary problems. However, I would also point out that certain things "were" done by various people (who shall now remain nameless) - things which very much had an adverse and unpleasant effect on the school life of many former students. Okay, I'm done now...! (Les Farrow)

Watching from the sidelines I am becoming increasingly tickled by the fear that alleged bullies generate. It must be nearly 30 years ago that most of this happened, yet some chaps are still'BRICKING'it! Does John have to be worried that Mr Binks will ask to see him by the bikesheds at 4.15? I think not (and he isn't). I know some of the messages could cause offence, but not as much offence as having a set of compasses embedded in your leg in the dinner queue. My task for the sake of the group is to root out my years tough chaps and get them to join up.They will have changed as we all grow up eventually. (Richard Marsh)

It was only a healthy respect,(i.e. fear), that got one through these difficult times. I must say that when I started to suggest that we stop this discussion it was with tongue in cheek. As others have said what happened - happened as a matter of fact. Of course it is easy to identify those who were 'characters' at school but now respectable people. It is much harder to identify those who may have been fine at school but turned into axe swinging maniacs later? No doubt they exist and have an equal propensity to join the Group. (Greg Cooper)

Speaking as someone who lived on Harold Hill between 1965 and 77 (in the midst of the worst excesses of the skinhead era and amongst some of the most extreme nutters imaginable) I am finding all this caution slightly curious and a tad amusing!

Although I was aware of their reputation I never had any problems at school with either Brian Hallett or Martin Binks (who I already knew of from 'the Hill). There were many others who were similarly "feared" during my time at the Lib and yes, these included many of my fellow citizens of the 1967 intake, several of whom have already been mentioned in despatches. Others were to be found in the infamous "4F" of Tom Saunders & Co from the '66 vintage, for example.

Throughout my time at the school there were several "notorious" individuals amongst every intake that caused many a shiver at the mention of their name and who have over time acquired a somewhat "legendary" status. While there is never smoke without fire we all know that stories of certain type can (and do) get slightly exaggerated! Come on guys, why the reticence? It all happened years ago!  I'm sure that many of the aforementioned "legends" would be intrigued to read these recollections amongst the "hearsay" and banter and know that even now, 30 years on, they have had such a profound impact on our reminiscences of our time together.

I didn't mix with Brian or his contemporaries at school and didn't know him well (and still do not). But when I bumped into him by chance at the Brentwood FC bar some time back and suddenly realised who I was talking to I took the opportunity as an intrigued "old boy" to remind him of his fearsome reputation plus some of the "stories" over a few beers, and survived !! I've not seen him for a few weeks now so I've not yet mentioned the site. I can say that some of his run-ins with Jake would be worth hearing - should he decide to join us! I've also not seen anything amongst the stories that's too contentious but must say that some of the content of this "debate" (re deletion of certain messages) and the accompanying trepidation does make me wonder whether we really have all grown up! (Steve Hyde)

I couldn't believe what I read this morning about removing posts. Surely we haven't reached that depth in this group. Over the life of RLSOldboys we have seen some  vitriolic posts. On the other hand we have also seen members offer apologies after posting something that resulted in  offence to others. However, I have not seen in the past, any suggestion that posts can be recanted because they might offend a prospective member. ere these posts untruthful? Did they malign the people referred to in them? Or were they merely comments along the lines of the Groups purpose "to swap stories of their schooldays." I think the latter.

I enjoy this Group but I emphatically do not agree that anything should be expurgated when such items meet the criteria of the Group's mission. As for eliminating "history" to accommodate a person who is not a member of the Group I can only say "B*ll*cks". (Mike Merry)

Speaking as someone who lived on Harold Hill between 1965 and 77 (in the midst of the worst excesses of the skinhead era and amongst some of the most extreme nutters imaginable) I am finding all this caution slightly curious and a tad amusing!.

Although I was aware of their reputation I never had any problems at school with either Brian Hallett or Martin Binks (who I already knew of from 'the Hill). There were many others who were similarly "feared" during my time at the Lib and yes, these included many of my fellow citizens of the 1967 intake, several of whom have already been mentioned in despatches. Others were to be found in the infamous "4F" of Tom Saunders & Co from the '66 vintage, for example.

Throughout my time at the school there were several "notorious" individuals amongst every intake that caused many a shiver at the mention of their name and who have over time acquired a somewhat "legendary" status. While there is never smoke without fire we all know that stories of certain type can (and do) get slightly exaggerated!

Come on guys, why the reticence? It all happened years ago!  I'm sure that many of the aforementioned "legends" would be intrigued to read these recollections amongst the "hearsay" and banter and know that even now, 30 years on, they have had such a profound impact on our reminiscences of our time together.

I didn't mix with Brian or his contemporaries at school and didn't know him well (and still do not). But when I bumped into him by chance at the Brentwood FC bar some time back and suddenly realised who I was talking to I took the opportunity as an intrigued "old boy" to remind him of his fearsome reputation plus some of the "stories" over a few beers, and survived !!

I've not seen him for a few weeks now so I've not yet mentioned the site. I can say that some of his run-ins with Jake would be worth hearing - should he decide to join us! I've also not seen anything amongst the stories that's too contentious but must say that some of the content of this "debate" (re deletion of certain messages) and the accompanying trepidation does make me wonder whether we really have all grown up! (Steve Hyde)

I am with Mike on this one. The school toughs had a lot of us running in fear when we were small boys. We are all big boys now,and so are our previous tormentors. I met mine after leaving school, and had a convivial time,accepted their apologies with good grace, and moved on. Expunging items from the history books puts me in mind of Stalin and selective history.1984 was 17 years ago. So far from delete delete delete I say carry on. There is nothing to be afraid of (RAM) 

I'm not sure yet if this group is a democracy or not, but if indeed it is, then I vote to "KEEP IT IN". What's the matter with you guys, this is the most interesting "thread" since I joined the group, and you want to kill it....! 'Nuff of that censorship already. Going back to someone else's comment, I certainly do not consider that I have indulged in any speculation or innuendo - I just told it like it was. I lived in fear a lot of the time, and as far as I'm concerned (opinion now), those b**t**ds had no right being at that school. There, now I've vented after 30 years, that feels much better...! Point is, I'm talking about a couple of kids who were doing certain things over 30 years ago. I have no idea, and really don't care, what or who they are now. They may be, and probably are, totally different people, I certainly know I am. They might even be, dare I say it, "nice". But as someone else said, this stuff happened, it's our history, so don't censor it. That's my humble opinion. (Les Farrow)

I knew and was friendly with Brian Hallet, although he was a year below me, as we both lived in Goodmayes. He was a great help to me on a number of occasions and I am concerned about the amount of ill-informed and unkind comment concerning Brian. Whilst it makes a tittilating discussion thread it does not reflect well on some of the correspondents. Better should be expected of Old Boys. Perhaps some of us should consider how we might feel were some of the problems of our youth exposed for public entertainment. (Robin Hackshall)

There is no censorship (I thought that I had made that clear) nor any Stalinist re-writing of history. Working on the belief that - * a correspondent's words remain *his* intellectual property, even after posting to the List; * a correspondent might not be afraid of retribution but may genuinely regret his comments ("I wish I hadn't said that"); * most of us (as reported) have done/said things that we later regret and wish could be undone; * the technology allows us to undo things in a way not previously possible; I have offered to remove messages from the archive. The offer remains open. Your choice. (Andy Lee)

I feel like a pr*t trying to explain the "censorship" b*ll*cks, but here goes. I think it's hilarious mimicking Brian (and us other East-Enders, including me in a pre-Lib life) as in: "I woz on the toppa thabus, like, wunn-I, when this geezer screwed me, like diddun-'e, like, so I striped 'im, like, knowhattamean, John" or however we want to talk about such stories. I think we're over the line, though, if we suddenly speculate about the GBH. Thassall, like. But On-On to a real point closer to home. The Right Hon. Andy Lee has in his possession a pickie of some local gals in uniform which just happens to contain the first lady with whom I had premarital sex (substitute your own f-word, guys) as well as one other lady who did same with one of my best friends at RLS. The problem is that despite writing to said old boy with attached photo, I can't get an answer out of the b*gger, though I desperately want to spill the beans on him. So chaps, what should I do - spill the beans or censor the truth till he's ready to be hanged with me like a man? (Ian Macauley)

My vote is with those who fight shy of any kind of censorship and/or any "mucking about" with the archives. ...back in the early days of the List when discussion took place on whether or not ex members of staff might wish to or be allowed to join up, similar fears were expressed. The consensus of opinion then was that there could be no gagging or censorship. Reminiscences WOULD be posted, regardless, as the property and responsibility of their authors. Those who might take exception could please themselves whether or not they took issue with what was written and ex-members of staff joined "at their own risk". Perhaps we have been fortunate with quality of those members of staff who joined and decided to stay; the List and its content has been the richer for their presence. But I would not want any of my own reminiscences removed merely for fear that the object of my occasional vitriolic comment might decide to subscribe. (DGM)

Tony good to hear from you!! I agree whole-heartedly re the butcher's shop - we need to know!! At the moment I'm completely stumped... miniced hemmings brought the badger in but I don't know who planted the polo mint - but I tip my hat to him now then - a philosophical note. i believe we should respect any members request for silence, and I certainly will for Richard. Only fair, etc. but how does this sit with the current debate regarding censorship of memories, with specific reference to Brian Hallett? my own view regarding this, but it is only a personal one and may not be applicable to more than just me, is that anything that is said about me is valid, whether I agree/disagree/like/dislike it - "publish and be damned". But if Brian Hallett now joins and requests silence - what then? do we apply the veto retrospectively? anybody out there with a degree in philosophy or ethics, please advise, because I'm out of my depth. (ash howe)

Terence Turner asked "has anyone estimated a) approx. how many pupils passed thru. RLS b) approx. how many old boys might still be out there? My very rough guesses would be as follows: the overall total incl. the current alumni, would be about 5600. Based on this, my very rough guess at the no. of old boys still around would be: 3879. How many subscribers? Internet access must be higher than 10%. So let's say 40% with internet access = 2,000 b) Say 10% show interest = 200 If we look at the figures a slightly different way ... Let's say 5,000 Old Libertian are still this side of the Pearly Gates and take internet access to now be 50% (any comment on either of these figures gents?) That's 2,500 potential Hon. Members. We are rapidly approaching #250, so our 'market penetration' is 10%. But we have a lot of work to do." (19 August 2001) (Andy Lee)

I feel the need to defend the content, conduct and general culture of the List in the light of recent messages: "... my poor brain has to struggle with a business responsibility for over 300 Telecom systems on over 160 sites in over 100 countries. That's some serious email pressure on a tough day (reality check, there)."
OK. Fair enough. Maybe business should be kept separate from leisure. Many of us have to deal with this distinction. Some of us find ways of managing it.
"You know, this "John Smith wrote : blah blah....." thing is not really me Personally I find "it very helpful when Fred Bloggs writes "John Smith wrote : blah blah....."
It helps me to connect with the appropriate thread. but someone recently suggested this method (of extracting the actual piece of text you're responding to) to keep the size of emails down, and I have to admit it makes sense."
That sounds like an excellent idea! I'd go with that.
'Trim, Trim, Trim' - as we say. Some of us do.
I've also been having problems with the volume of emails, particularly as I receive them at work, and any day now I'm expecting to get arrested by the email police...! See above ... "business should be kept separate from leisure"
"I really wish that some of the members would actually have something to say before they send out emails - For example - "Here, here" really doesn't do much for me."
I disagree. The number of 'Hear Hear, I agree' messages is very small compared to the other e-mail lists that I am/have been subscribed to. I can't think of the last message that didn't add a little something, a witty comment, something extra.
" The other thing that I don't quite understand is why a lot of supposedly mature men in their 40's and 50's still sound like bratty schoolboys"
The first thing that an applying member sees is: 'This mailing list is a light-hearted opportunity for former pupils and former staff of The Royal Liberty School, Romford, Essex to reminisce about their school days, their school masters and their friends and colleagues.' "light-hearted ... reminisce ..." Is this not an invitation to "sound like bratty schoolboys"? Is this not the whole point of this group? What else are we here for? The next thing that an accepted member sees is:
"Before you read on please be aware:
* The volume of messages can be fairly large - the average is 12-15 per day - sometimes it is much larger. Some Members find it difficult to cope with so there are various options that control the volume of e-mail you receive:
* Individual e-mails ... Filter ... Daily Digest ... Special Announcements ... Web Only ... etc. " followed by precise instructions on how to control the volume of messages. There's no excuse for "Oh dear - I can't cope with all these e-mails."
* This group is a self-regulating organism ... sometimes it goes this way; sometimes it goes that way; always it goes in whichever direction the Members take it. How else could it be? (Andy Lee)

I fail to see why you felt any defence necessary: "Chacun A son gout". (David Gregory)