Re: Purpose of the List

["Michael Stabin" <michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu>]

First, let's check our definitions...from your welcome message:



"The Radiation Safety Distribution list is an electronic mailing list for

Health Physicists, Medical Physicists, Radiological

Engineers and others who have a professional interest in matters related to

Radiation Protection."



Then the first list guideline:



"Please keep in mind that RADSAFE is for the discussion of issues related to

radiation protection.  Messages which do not add substantive content to the

discussion are not appreciated. Flames, coarse language, and negative

personal comments about members of the list or others are unprofessional and

never appropriate."



The list serves both to help people seek professional resources and have

professional discussions of techical matters, as well as to "discuss

issues". ANY issue related to radiation protection is fair game in my

thinking, and ANY opinion, pro-, con-, or in between is welcome, as long as

the topic remains radiation protection and a courteous tone is maintained. I

try to be a light-handed moderator and let discussions meander off topic at

times, as long as this does not run on too long.



Specifically, as related to this discussion, I will respectfully disagree

with my good friend Steve and say that posting of information from "news

sources", even if they are biased (I don't know of many that aren't), if

they relate to radiation protection are acceptable. The l-o-o-o-o-ng

discussion that has been going on since day one of this list, on low level

dose and effects, is clearly of interest to many and certainly on-topic. I

feel that Radsafe is great for "Does anyone know where I can find..."

postings as well as for these more philosophical discussions. Some of the

latter (my own posts included) get long winded sometimes, and if they don't

interest you, you may use your delete key with gusto. I don't see the need

to break up the list into "practical" and "philosophical", or some other

artificial distinction, and I don't want a "closed" list in which we cannot

hear and discuss diverse opinions that relate to this subject matter. If a

piece of information is biased or erroneous, ignore it or criticize it,

that's part of the discussion, just keep it respectful of all parties

involved. I find that my thinking improves MORE when I listen to views that

are different from my own than when I just hang around with folks who agree

with me on most things.



So, that's the position of your moderator. Speaking just as a participant, I

think the list is basically quite healthy in its current form and certainly

serves a useful purpose. I may have related the great success I had once

from Brasil in seeking resources for an investigator there, who was

astounded at the volume of great technical information they received in a

half-day's time from one Radsafe post, when they had previously been

frustrated in library searches. My thinking has been sharpened by listening

to all the debate on LNT, and I am appreciative of that input. OK, speaking

of long winded posts.....I need to shut up and get back to work!





Mike



Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP

Assistant Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences

Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences

Vanderbilt University

1161 21st Avenue South

Nashville, TN 37232-2675

Phone (615) 322-3190

Fax   (615) 322-3764

e-mail  michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu







************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.