is it true the toilet bowl water in oz spins in the oposite direction?


>From: Glenn Sanders <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: RAIN 070124
>Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 11:15:11 +1100
>
>On 27/01/07, Marion Sumerianlibrarian <[log in to unmask]>
>wrote:
>>
>>it seems we still live in a highly undemocratic
>>society where the free exchange of ideas is not
>>honored . . . . my evaluation of the overwhelming
>>majority of rain postings is that they are boring, as
>>well as biased, but i have never stated they should be
>>banned.
>
>
>
>Look, I find this simply weird.
>
>When I did my research librarian training far too many years ago, and when 
>I
>did some graduate research training more recently, I was taught that if
>your search construction is professional then any resulting bias (or
>presumably boredom) reflects not the search construction but the nature of
>the material being searched.
>
>So there exist two logical possibilities: either Peter is unprofessional in
>his search construction, or the World's media writes on matters RM in a
>biased way.
>
>You can prove the first by producing evidence of consistent failure to
>select articles, with the bias consistently favouring one view or another,
>rather than falling 50:50 either way as chance would have it (see Evans,
>Richard: Lying about Hitler; History, Holocaust and the David Irving Trial,
>ISBN 0465021530).
>
>You could if you wished prove the second by producing evidence of RM events
>ignored or misreported over a long time by some or all of the media. Sounds
>like a good PhD thesis.
>
>There is of course a third possibility, which is that RM generically, and 
>RM
>people specifically, are intrinsically boring. For example, I can certainly
>prattle on for hours if not days . . .
>
>I get a lot of value out of this list, and sometimes from RAIN. I've had
>great discussions on and off list with all sorts of people, even the mighty
>Saklad. I think I'm old and scarred enough, if not well trained in history,
>librarianship and records, to detect bias and ignore or allow for it. Maybe
>my postings have helped or even interested others, even though I suspect 
>I'm
>way to the left of Steve "I hate paper", and probably way left even of
>PeterK. But from up here in Oz, 'left' is relative anyway, regardless of
>bias, we are always on top, and always a day ahead of all of you except our
>good mates in New Zealand.
>
>Life rolls on. It would be REALLY boring if we were all the same.
>
>But back to the main topic: accusations of bias are a serious matter. Some
>evidence would be nice. If you have none, you can probably figure out the
>professional thing to do.
>
>Cheers
>
>
>Glenn
>>
>>Glenn Sanders MRMA
>>listservs: [log in to unmask]
>>work: [log in to unmask]
>>Australia
>>
>>These views are mine alone. They may or may not be those of any
>>previous or present employers or clients. I don't know. If I'd asked
>>and they'd agreed, I would have signed it "Harry Peck and Co and
>>Glenn". Or whatever. But I haven't, so I didn't.
>
>List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
>Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

_________________________________________________________________
Search for grocery stores. Find gratitude. Turn a simple search into 
something more. 
http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_gratitude&FORM=WLMTAG

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance