On 1 April 2023, I shared feeling uncomfortable that one person posted much more on the Alexander Technique Forum than others in March.

I wondered if other members of the group were feeling likewise. The response to this comment was 17 likes, four hugs and one heart emoji. (The group’s founder Robert Rickover (RR) posted over 50% of the March posts; mostly contributions from his podcast.) The following is a summary of the topics that cropped up in the 127 comments, in which 28 people participated in the ensuing discussion - until the discussion was halted.

Acknowledgement, respect, and appreciation of RR’s work in maintaining the AT Forum was expressed. Furthermore, people learning the AT who don’t have a teacher nearby stated how useful the Forum was.

One of the main emerging themes was that several people had posted, but their contribution had been refused because it had been deemed by RR to lack relevance to the Alexander Technique. This feedback had puzzled people; some had become disheartened and had decided to contribute less to the Forum. Others had stopped posting; various people felt side-lined. Some felt their contribution was unwelcome and had not continued posting for this reason. RR stated that he had not deleted a post when the relevance to AT had been clarified. One person commenting pointed out there may be different understandings of what ‘relevant’ is – just as there is diversity in the Alexander Technique world. RR suggested some people may not have read the guidelines, but this was refuted. Likewise, this supposed lack of relevance, it was proposed, arises because the guidelines are nebulous. In this vein, it was also suggested that the moderation of the group was arbitrary. Hope was expressed that while judgment on RR’s part as an administrator is necessary, he would choose a path of openness and dialogue regarding what is published.

Appreciation for bringing up this topic was expressed; it was noted that open discussions on the Forum had recently become seldom. I repeatedly noted that all I wished for is more balance, this call was countered by pointing out anyone can post and that it was unfair to ask a person to post less – others should post more. One suggestion that was made was to specify a day each month to advertise free and not-free services. Interest was expressed in seeing how colleagues promote their work; we could be learning marketing skills from one another.

As a solution, it was suggested setting up a different group with a more democratic and transparent strategy regarding what may be shared might be a good idea. The international Alexander Congress stance of openness was also recommended as guidance. Some felt that because it was RR’s page, it is natural and right that he posts a lot (to raise visibility). Others proposed (tongue in cheek) renaming The Alexander Forum accordingly.

The discussion was closed by RR and his co-moderator Rena Anya Devéza on Sunday 2 April. Four people liked this decision, three were angry, and one was surprised.

 Author: Nicola Hanefeld, 8.4.2023

Postscript: the discussion from 1 to 2 April has now been deleted from The Alexander Forum - I deeply regret that loss of transparency.