Dear friends, I do not think the controversy over the directory has to do with paranoia on the part of those who objected to having their names included. Nor do I think that those who objected are trying to stop the publication of the directory as a previous poster has suggested. To me it seems a simple matter of cour- tesy. When I first saw the notice regarding the directory I thought it was a good and timely idea and sent in my entry as requested. When I saw the notice explaining the use of the museum-l membership list, I did not pay much attention since I had already sent in my entry. However, when the first murmurings of protest began to surface, I did think those who objected had a point. Why should the onus be on the subscriber to museum-l to "conceal" their name from someone compiling such a document? I realize the membership of this listserv is readily available using the "review" command, but does that mean that there should be no self-imposed ethics regarding how such information is used? I think those who are compiling the directory should have relied en- tirely on the request for submissions they sent out. I appreciated their desire for comprehensiveness, but if the response was so poor, perhaps they should have rethought the project. Furthermore, as has already been mentioned, getting the list of members from the listserv would not even get them the information they desired, since it would not include areas of interest, telephone numbers, etc. It would also include a lot of people who are not necessarily employed in museums or related cultural institutions, but just happen to have an active interest in the field. Respectfully submitted, Steven (P.S. I STILL think the directory is a great idea -- please keep my entry!) ********************************************************************** Steven R. Smith Art Collection Tel: (617)495-3150 Harvard Law School FAX: (617)495-4449 Cambridge, MA 02138 E-mail: [log in to unmask] **********************************************************************