A mother lode of ideas.

The NCEW listserv (a shorthand term we still use for the critter even though we no longer use LIST-SERV[C] software) has changed the character of our organization--for the better, in my opinion.

As recently as a decade ago, membership in NCEW could be an exercise in relative isolation, especially if you didn't attend the annual convention or regional sessions.

Perks of membership in such instances were a couple of newsletters and four Mastheads a year, perhaps augmented with a one-on-one critique partnership, snail-mailing or faxing your editorials back and forth for comment and criticism. Truly dedicated members mailed out a tearsheet of their page to every other member each year. (Occasionally one of those tearsheets still floats in through the mailroom like an ancient bottle bearing a long-forgotten message.)

Now the contact is instant and constant. We have the tools to become much more deeply and frequently acquainted with our fellow members and the issues that concern them. This is especially valuable for the sixty to seventy percent of our members who do not attend the annual convention. No NCEW member need feel isolated in this fourth year of the millennium.

For The Masthead, the listserv is ever more important. NCEW records contain frequent references, from the earliest days of the listserv, to the possibility that it would become a prime resource for Masthead editors. And indeed, those early speculations have come to pass. This editor joins previous editors in drawing inspiration and ideas from the discussions of the members.

Consider the current 'Masthead' issue:

* The symposium is rooted in a listserv discussion that occurred last August after Rod Dreher, relaying a friend's concerns, asked whether a formal journalism education was the best route to a career in journalism. Key parts of that discussion are reproduced, starting on page four, alongside the reactions of journalism educators.

* As listserv participants, week after week, exposed campaigns to plant phony letters in their reader-access columns, your Masthead editor began to see less a smattering of similar incidents than a single relentless threat to the integrity of our letters columns. I asked Charley Reinken if he agreed and, if so, would help us look beyond the trees to the forest. The result is on page 23.

* Ed Williams and Harry Austin took opposite sides in a listserv discussion about the extending of op-ed access to government officials. This led to our request that they present their views in a pro-and-con feature for this edition. Turn to page 24 to see how it turned out.

The potential exists, I suppose, for over-tapping the listserv for Masthead inspiration. The potential also exists for missing a listserv topic that Masthead readers would like to see, or even expect to see, amplified and ambered for the record. I guess that's why we have readers--to let us know, either way. Please do.