© 1991 Madeline Noordzy
© 1991 ANZURA, Australia & New Zealand Urantia Association
As readers of Six-O-Six may have noticed, over the past few issues the range of articles has covered a broader scope than previously. Some agree with this, and some don’t. My co-editor, Neil Francey, disagrees and wrote his thoughts down as follows:
“A publication representing readers of The URANTIA Book is offered enormous scope for content. The explicit nature of that book’s pronouncements however, further implies that constraints may also be imposed. A well-balanced mix of opposing points of view on a wide variety of issues with an even-handed editorial approach has come to be the expectation of readers of this journal.”
“It appears that Six-0-Six has in recent issues weighted its articles and editorial comments to a particular interest group and away from a strict URANTIA Book discipline. Readers are now having to address a new direction. Is this publication continuing to assist readers evaluate new ideas providing greater insights and understanding? Is it meeting changing needs? As a result, is Six-0-Six enjoying and increasing appreciation by readers or is it becoming too general?”
“Madeline and I have discussed these matters in detail. We believe it is important to do so from time to time. At present, we differ.”
“We even considered forming two distinct publications, each with independent editorial control. In this way we would have pursued topics we each considered important. This though may have become divisive. So at this time we continue to recognize our opposing points of view and the current situation prevails.”
“As co-publisher of Six-0-Six, I wish to independently raise the issue of reviewing this publication.”
“In the latter part of 1985 , with an expanded format, I saw the need and opportunity to involve others in its production. The main responsibility for continuity was graciously accepted by Madeline.”
“Since that time, the workload has increased particularly with the overseas mailing list.”
“The problem of long-term viability for the publication still exists as it is even today primarily dependent on Madeline’s superb efforts. And we have the ongoing question of the most appropriate editorial policy to represent ever changing times.”
“Is it relevant or even advisable for Madeline now to be given support by the newly formed readers association mentioned elsewhere in this issue? An autonomous editorial board affiliated with the association may feel it can contribute to a more unified approach.”
“It is imperative that Six-O-Six maintain the high reputation and integrity that it has come to enjoy around the world.”
I have discussed the whole issue with the “third member” of our team, Tony Rudd, and we have developed an approach which we feel should make everybody happy. You will notice that this issue of Six-O-Six is structured differently to other issues. We have included a “Part 2”. We have chosen to put into the main section all issues that relate directly to The URANTIA Book, including readers’ personal experiences, comments or observations, plus the normal poems, crosswords etc. This is more or less the same content pattern that existed in earlier times. We have then assembled all other material that addresses broader issues into Part 2.
Any reader who wants only the traditional material should write to Six-O-Six and ask that only the first section be sent.
I would like to point out that it has always been the policy of Six-O-Six to publish readers’ contributions with the minimum of editing. Over the years we have decided not to publish only a few readers’ contributions. Where this has happened, it has only been after consultation between editors.
We would like all our readers, including our overseas friends, to have a say in this new approach as well and are looking forward to your comments.
Madeline Noordzy